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
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
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,
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,
4 matches
Mail list logo