openafs on alpha

2001-03-02 Thread Michael Stroucken
Hello, For the past two weeks I have been trying to port openafs to the alpha. I've had mostly decent success (through experience -- at IBM I was porting it to i386-Linux before the source was commonly available). So now the server processes, the kernel module and afsd compile and run, but

Re: boot-floppies on alpha

2001-03-02 Thread Herbert Xu
T. Weyergraf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > just a question: Do the boot-floppies on alpha have a maintainer ? > IIRC, they didn't, but Ron Farrer took a look at it. Ron Farrer was the only one who showed interest when I offered it up for adoption. His email address is [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Debia

boot-floppies on alpha

2001-03-02 Thread T. Weyergraf
Hi, just a question: Do the boot-floppies on alpha have a maintainer ? IIRC, they didn't, but Ron Farrer took a look at it. Just curious... Regards, Thomas -- Thomas Weyergraf[EMAIL PROTECTED] My Favorite IA64 Opcode-guess ( see arch/ia64/lib

Re: Qt lives!

2001-03-02 Thread Ivan E. Moore II
> > > Does this mean we can also get all the not-yet-in-alpha KDE stuff > > > working? I'll have a go... > > > > Already tried...still problematic. Same with mozilla. At least Qt works > > somewhat :-) > > I'm using a g++ wrapper at the moment that re-execs g++ with s/-O2/-O0/ > done on the ar

Re: Qt lives!

2001-03-02 Thread Paul Slootman
On Fri 02 Mar 2001, Christopher C. Chimelis wrote: > On Fri, 2 Mar 2001, Paul Slootman wrote: > > > Does this mean we can also get all the not-yet-in-alpha KDE stuff > > working? I'll have a go... > > Already tried...still problematic. Same with mozilla. At least Qt works > somewhat :-) I'm u

Re: Qt lives!

2001-03-02 Thread Christopher C. Chimelis
On Fri, 2 Mar 2001, Paul Slootman wrote: > Cool! > > Does this mean we can also get all the not-yet-in-alpha KDE stuff > working? I'll have a go... Already tried...still problematic. Same with mozilla. At least Qt works somewhat :-) C

Re: menu 2.1.5-6.1.1 in the archive should be OK

2001-03-02 Thread Christopher C. Chimelis
On Fri, 2 Mar 2001, Paul Slootman wrote: > I saw that there was 1:2.95.3-6 in the archive for the other arches, > did you miss that or is there a reason you're sticking to -5 for the > NMU? -6 doesn't build (dies before stage1). I still haven't looked to see what changed to cause that, but ther

Re: PGPERL

2001-03-02 Thread Paul Slootman
On Thu 01 Mar 2001, George A. Dowding wrote: > > Not to important, but pgperl which uses pgplot seg faults when trying > to generate GIF's. It works fine with postscript. Also it works ok > on i86 Ugh, I hate this sort of problem... How about PNG output? Paul Slootman -- home: [EMAIL P

Re: Qt lives!

2001-03-02 Thread Paul Slootman
On Thu 01 Mar 2001, Christopher C. Chimelis wrote: > > Well, I removed the mi-thunk patch that had earlier been useful and > voila! Qt now works perfectly when compiled by gcc 2.95.3-5.0.1 (in > incoming now). I just uploaded the libs generated by qt-x11 and also > qtcups, so get them while they'

Re: menu 2.1.5-6.1.1 in the archive should be OK

2001-03-02 Thread Paul Slootman
On Thu 01 Mar 2001, Christopher C. Chimelis wrote: > > > Ok, great. I think the problem is directly caused by the C++ breaking in > > gcc. I'm going to have another go at at least fixing it well enough to > > handle small stuff like this (handling Qt is another story altogether). > > Ok, found