Bug#539427: Segmentation fault of iasl on non i386/amd64

2010-06-26 Thread Mattia Dongili
On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 10:11:10PM +0900, Mattia Dongili wrote: On Sun, Oct 25, 2009 at 01:15:06AM +0200, Guillem Jover wrote: Hi! [ Removing #516057 as it's a closed bug about a bison error. ] On Sat, 2009-10-24 at 18:19:51 +0200, Luk Claes wrote: Can you please have a look at

Bug#539427: Segmentation fault of iasl on non i386/amd64

2009-10-28 Thread Mattia Dongili
On Sun, Oct 25, 2009 at 01:15:06AM +0200, Guillem Jover wrote: Hi! [ Removing #516057 as it's a closed bug about a bison error. ] On Sat, 2009-10-24 at 18:19:51 +0200, Luk Claes wrote: Can you please have a look at fixing the segfaults of iasl on non i386/amd64 or do you think it would

Bug#539427: Segmentation fault of iasl on non i386/amd64

2009-10-24 Thread Luk Claes
Hi Can you please have a look at fixing the segfaults of iasl on non i386/amd64 or do you think it would be better to remove the support of iasl on non i386/amd64. If so, bochs is the only affected reverse dep of iasl if you would restrict iasl to i386/amd64. Cheers Luk -- To UNSUBSCRIBE,

Bug#539427: Segmentation fault of iasl on non i386/amd64

2009-10-24 Thread Guillem Jover
Hi! [ Removing #516057 as it's a closed bug about a bison error. ] On Sat, 2009-10-24 at 18:19:51 +0200, Luk Claes wrote: Can you please have a look at fixing the segfaults of iasl on non i386/amd64 or do you think it would be better to remove the support of iasl on non i386/amd64. If so,