David <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Thu, Aug 26, 2004 at 12:35:08PM -0700, bob wrote:
>> I've looked around and can't find the .jigdo files for the AMD64
>> distribution?
>
> Good point. Perhaps you could download the sarge ones (if you can find
> them) and modify them to point to the amd64 r
Jérôme Warnier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Le jeu 26/08/2004 à 13:50, Goswin von Brederlow a écrit :
>> Sebastian Steinlechner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>> > On Wed, 2004-08-25 at 12:34, Sebastian Steinlechner wrote:
>> >
>> >> So, could someone please rebuild the debian-files package to n
On Thu, Aug 26, 2004 at 12:35:08PM -0700, bob wrote:
> I've looked around and can't find the .jigdo files for the AMD64 distribution?
Good point. Perhaps you could download the sarge ones (if you can find
them) and modify them to point to the amd64 repository.
dd
--
David Dooling
Today (26-Aug-2004 08:48 105M)I'v used :
http://debian-amd64.alioth.debian.org/install-images/sid-amd64-netinst.iso
on my laptop (Medion WAD2000)
All the installation process works fine !!! Great work.
The only problem is that my b44 module (ethernet card) don't work, and
so i can't configure
Le jeu 26/08/2004 à 13:50, Goswin von Brederlow a écrit :
> Sebastian Steinlechner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > On Wed, 2004-08-25 at 12:34, Sebastian Steinlechner wrote:
> >
> >> So, could someone please rebuild the debian-files package to not depend
> >> on openoffice.org-bin, but openoffic
I've looked around and can't find the .jigdo files for the AMD64 distribution?
Bob
-Original Message-
From: David <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Aug 25, 2004 7:14 AM
To: debian-amd64@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: Dialup Netinstall
On Tue, Aug 24, 2004 at 05:55:37PM -0700, bob wrote:
> I'm try
On 04-Aug-26 17:18, Harald Dunkel wrote:
> Andreas Jochens wrote:
> >>Is there a list of packages in pure64, that have serious problems
> >>if built with gcc-3.4?
> >
> >The attached list of packages from 'sid' has build problems for the
> >amd64/gcc-3.4 archive.
>
> AFAICS these packages don't e
Pete Harlan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Thanks for your reply!
>
> On Thu, Aug 26, 2004 at 01:55:05PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
>> As I see it the sarge-amd64 fork will be gcc-3.3 compiled since
>> gcc-3.4 would need a lot more changes. That means the main sid archive
>> will also stay
"Harald Dunkel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Andreas Jochens wrote:
>> On 04-Aug-26 15:22, Harald Dunkel wrote:
>>
>>>Is there a list of packages in pure64, that have serious problems
>>>if built with gcc-3.4?
>> The attached list of packages from 'sid' has build problems for the
>> amd64/gcc-3.4
Thanks for your reply!
On Thu, Aug 26, 2004 at 01:55:05PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> As I see it the sarge-amd64 fork will be gcc-3.3 compiled since
> gcc-3.4 would need a lot more changes. That means the main sid archive
> will also stay with gcc-3.3 and follow the normal debian transit
Andreas Jochens wrote:
On 04-Aug-26 15:22, Harald Dunkel wrote:
Is there a list of packages in pure64, that have serious problems
if built with gcc-3.4?
The attached list of packages from 'sid' has build problems for the
amd64/gcc-3.4 archive.
[snip]
AFAICS these packages don't exist for pure64,
On 04-Aug-26 15:22, Harald Dunkel wrote:
> Is there a list of packages in pure64, that have serious problems
> if built with gcc-3.4?
The attached list of packages from 'sid' has build problems for the
amd64/gcc-3.4 archive.
Regards
Andreas Jochens
ace
agenda
alex
alsamixergui
am-utils
annoyanc
Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Pete Harlan) writes:
What's the future of amd64 compiled with gcc-3.4?
As I see it the sarge-amd64 fork will be gcc-3.3 compiled since
gcc-3.4 would need a lot more changes. That means the main sid archive
will also stay with gcc-3.3 and follow the n
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Pete Harlan) writes:
> What's the future of amd64 compiled with gcc-3.4?
As I see it the sarge-amd64 fork will be gcc-3.3 compiled since
gcc-3.4 would need a lot more changes. That means the main sid archive
will also stay with gcc-3.3 and follow the normal debian transition to
Sebastian Steinlechner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Wed, 2004-08-25 at 12:34, Sebastian Steinlechner wrote:
>
>> So, could someone please rebuild the debian-files package to not depend
>> on openoffice.org-bin, but openoffice.org instead?
>
> I just realised that this is wrong of course. Furth
On Wed, Aug 11, 2004 at 12:08:38PM +0200, Harald Dunkel wrote:
>
> You should mention the sources.list for this. AFAIK its
>
> deb http://debian-amd64.alioth.debian.org/gcc-3.4/ unstable main non-free
> contrib
> deb-src http://debian-amd64.alioth.debian.org/gcc-3.4/ unstable main
> non-free co
16 matches
Mail list logo
