Taketoshi Sano [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hi.
Goswin von Brederlow [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Just plain lseek will do. With _FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 that is all you
need. I don't see the point of using the lseek64 alias.
I don't know much about that. My experience told me
that libc5 system
Hi James,
given that a go now... unfortunately failed build.
Unfortunately, that's what life on the bleeding edge of kernel
development can be like...
Here is the bits I think are relevant to it failing:
CC kernel/rt.o
CC kernel/latency.o
kernel/latency.c: In function
[Please repect the MFT; I'm not subscribed]
I'm trying to clear up my buglog, and #290758 is amd64-only. I have no
means of testing this bug myself, and being an X package it isn't
particularly conducive to network testing.
I requested the submitter produce a backtrace a couple of days ago, but
Hi,
The bug only affects the binary compiled with gcc-3.3 using -O1 or greater
level of optimizations. gdb yields the following backtrace on at the time
fbpanel compiled with gcc-3.3 -O1 -g segfaults:
--
GNU gdb 6.3-debian
Copyright 2004 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
GDB is free
hi folks
great update.After update it had token 5 hours for mysql to get it back to
work ! There is no normal way to downgrade back to 4.0 !!!
best regards
thomas
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hello Thomas
On 2005-03-15 Thomas Weyers wrote:
great update.After update it had token 5 hours for mysql to get it back to
work ! There is no normal way to downgrade back to 4.0 !!!
This is the wrong list to complain about MySQL :) Please file a bug
report using reportbug if you spotted a
On Monday 14 March 2005 5:05pm, Taketoshi Sano wrote:
Hi.
Goswin von Brederlow [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Just plain lseek will do. With _FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 that is all you
need. I don't see the point of using the lseek64 alias.
I don't know much about that. My experience told me
that
On Tue, Mar 15, 2005 at 04:16:42PM -0500, Lennart Sorensen wrote:
On Wed, Mar 16, 2005 at 08:08:59AM +1100, Matthew Palmer wrote:
OK, should I make gcc3.4 (or gcc = 3.4 -- I'm not sure which one is the
right way to go) a build-dep on amd64 then? I suppose I could, alternately,
force the
Hi Matthew,
El mi, 16-03-2005 a las 08:08 +1100, Matthew Palmer escribi:
On Tue, Mar 15, 2005 at 01:19:29PM +0200, Modestas Vainius wrote:
The bug only affects the binary compiled with gcc-3.3 using -O1 or greater
level of optimizations. gdb yields the following backtrace on at the time
On Tue, Mar 15, 2005 at 09:58:18PM +, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
It would be nice if someone could re-build the whole archive since
this would give the box some good stress testing.
I'm not sure why you're asking this? Is it because it's an
Intel? Do you think it's going to behave
* Kurt Roeckx [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2005-03-15 23:09]:
It would be nice if someone could re-build the whole archive since
this would give the box some good stress testing.
I'm not sure why you're asking this? Is it because it's an Intel?
Yes.
Do you think it's going to behave differently
On Tue, Mar 15, 2005 at 10:15:50PM +, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
I know most of the AMD64 work has already been done on AMD hardware,
and I'm grateful for that work. But I obtained this EM64T box for
Debian so we can *test* whether Debian works rather than just assume
it will.
We got
I hope it works! I have 8 1850's (2.8 GHz EM64T's) running unstable at
the moment (with the test SMP kernel), and have another 34 on order!
Adrian
Wolfson Brain Imaging Centre
University of Cambridge
-Original Message-
From: Kurt Roeckx [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 15 March 2005
Kurt Roeckx wrote:
On Tue, Mar 15, 2005 at 10:15:50PM +, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
I know most of the AMD64 work has already been done on AMD hardware,
and I'm grateful for that work. But I obtained this EM64T box for
Debian so we can *test* whether Debian works rather than just assume
it
On Tue, Mar 15, 2005 at 02:33:29PM -0800, Alex Perry wrote:
I think it would be great to have a pure64 AMD64 machine rebuild its own
packages, reinstall them, then rebuild the whole archive.
In parallel, have an EM64T machine do exactly the same thing - also for
the current state of the
That's true.
Kurt Roeckx wrote:
On Tue, Mar 15, 2005 at 02:33:29PM -0800, Alex Perry wrote:
I think it would be great to have a pure64 AMD64 machine rebuild its own
packages, reinstall them, then rebuild the whole archive.
In parallel, have an EM64T machine do exactly the same thing - also for
On Tuesday 15 March 2005 06:14, Alex Perry wrote:
Marc MERLIN wrote:
We already have a custom toolchain to build 64 binaries, static or
dynamic, and my only requirement for now is to be able to run 64 binaries
on them. Static only would be ok initially.
Static is trivial; just put them
Just curious if anyone else has Konqueror/famd issues. With famd, my
Konqueror file browsing will work fine until x hours later. At this
point, Konqueror freezes on the first directory it shows. Then on a 'ps
aux', I notice the famd process in a DUninterruptible sleep
(usually IO) or Z
Alex Perry schrieb:
That's true.
Kurt Roeckx wrote:
On Tue, Mar 15, 2005 at 02:33:29PM -0800, Alex Perry wrote:
I think it would be great to have a pure64 AMD64 machine rebuild its
own packages, reinstall them, then rebuild the whole archive.
In parallel, have an EM64T machine do exactly the
goldedplus compiled for AMD64 is unusable.
I've filed up a bugreport
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=299734
Max
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Just want to check with someone else before I reportbug..
Can you run ntp-server?
Can you also run ntpq - lpeers without crash of ntpq and ntpd?
Mar 16 07:27:53 trillian kernel: ntpd[24091]: segfault at
rip 00425eb7 rsp 007fb998 error 4
/n - running pure64
--
To
a user told me off list:
install amd64-libs
This alone mostly solved my problems: I was able to run a 64 bit binary on
an otherwise stock 32bit debian system with a 64 bit kernel
$ ldd hello_64
libc.so.6 =
22 matches
Mail list logo
