r1061 - in glibc-package/trunk/debian: . patches sysdeps

Author: schizo Date: 2005-12-17 14:38:23 + (Sat, 17 Dec 2005) New Revision: 1061 Removed: glibc-package/trunk/debian/patches/sparc64-tls.dpatch Modified: glibc-package/trunk/debian/changelog glibc-package/trunk/debian/patches/00list glibc-package/trunk/debian/sysdeps/sparc.mk Log:

r1062 - in glibc-package/trunk/debian: . patches

Author: schizo Date: 2005-12-17 14:43:10 + (Sat, 17 Dec 2005) New Revision: 1062 Added: glibc-package/trunk/debian/patches/sparc-socket-weakalias.dpatch Modified: glibc-package/trunk/debian/changelog glibc-package/trunk/debian/patches/00list Log: * Add patch to fix build failure

Processed: sparc fixes committed to svn

Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: tag 340835 + pending Bug#340835: sparc: /lib64/libc.so.6: unexpected reloc type 0x4f Tags were: patch Bug#341514: libc6-sparc64: All 64-bit binaries fail to execute. Tags added: pending tag 342755 + pending Bug#342755: glibc: ftbfs [sparc] Error:

r1063 - in glibc-package/trunk/debian: . patches

Author: schizo Date: 2005-12-17 15:14:53 + (Sat, 17 Dec 2005) New Revision: 1063 Added: glibc-package/trunk/debian/patches/powerpc-socket-weakalias.dpatch Modified: glibc-package/trunk/debian/changelog glibc-package/trunk/debian/patches/00list Log: * Add patch from Anton Blanchard

r1064 - in glibc-package/trunk/debian: . patches

Author: schizo Date: 2005-12-17 15:29:13 + (Sat, 17 Dec 2005) New Revision: 1064 Added: glibc-package/trunk/debian/patches/amd64-semtrywait-weakalias.dpatch Modified: glibc-package/trunk/debian/changelog glibc-package/trunk/debian/patches/00list Log: * Replace amd64 sem_trywait

r1065 - in glibc-package/trunk/debian: . patches

Author: schizo Date: 2005-12-17 15:35:23 + (Sat, 17 Dec 2005) New Revision: 1065 Added: glibc-package/trunk/debian/patches/divdi3-moddi3.dpatch Modified: glibc-package/trunk/debian/changelog glibc-package/trunk/debian/patches/00list Log: * Add patch from Anton Blanchard to fix

r1066 - in glibc-package/trunk/debian: . control.in

Author: schizo Date: 2005-12-17 15:44:47 + (Sat, 17 Dec 2005) New Revision: 1066 Modified: glibc-package/trunk/debian/changelog glibc-package/trunk/debian/control glibc-package/trunk/debian/control.in/main Log: * Bump Standards-Version to 3.6.2 and add myself to Uploaders.

Bug#313219: Let op: Het bericht aan [EMAIL PROTECTED] is tegengehouden door de mailfilter van thuis.nl.

Een e-mail van u is tegengehouden door de mailfilter van thuis.nl. Het bericht was gezonden aan: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Het onderwerp was: Re: Thank you for delivery. De zender was: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Het bericht was ontvangen op 17-12-2005 om 19:06:52. Het verzend adres was: 82.98.249.10. De

Processing of glibc_2.3.5-9_sparc.changes

glibc_2.3.5-9_sparc.changes uploaded successfully to localhost along with the files: glibc_2.3.5-9.dsc glibc_2.3.5-9.diff.gz glibc-doc_2.3.5-9_all.deb locales_2.3.5-9_all.deb libc6_2.3.5-9_sparc.deb libc6-dev_2.3.5-9_sparc.deb libc6-prof_2.3.5-9_sparc.deb

Bug#339389: marked as done (glibc: FTBFS on amd64: sem_trywait.S:59: Error: symbol `sem_trywait' is already defined)

Your message dated Sat, 17 Dec 2005 13:47:59 -0800 with message-id [EMAIL PROTECTED] and subject line Bug#339389: fixed in glibc 2.3.5-9 has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your

Bug#339415: marked as done (FTBFS: Redefinitions of __divdi3, __moddi3, __udivdi32, and __umoddi3)

Your message dated Sat, 17 Dec 2005 13:47:59 -0800 with message-id [EMAIL PROTECTED] and subject line Bug#339415: fixed in glibc 2.3.5-9 has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your

Bug#340835: marked as done (sparc: /lib64/libc.so.6: unexpected reloc type 0x4f)

Your message dated Sat, 17 Dec 2005 13:47:59 -0800 with message-id [EMAIL PROTECTED] and subject line Bug#340835: fixed in glibc 2.3.5-9 has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your

Bug#341514: marked as done (libc6-sparc64: All 64-bit binaries fail to execute.)

Your message dated Sat, 17 Dec 2005 13:47:59 -0800 with message-id [EMAIL PROTECTED] and subject line Bug#340835: fixed in glibc 2.3.5-9 has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your

Bug#341514: marked as done (libc6-sparc64: All 64-bit binaries fail to execute.)

Your message dated Sat, 17 Dec 2005 13:47:59 -0800 with message-id [EMAIL PROTECTED] and subject line Bug#341514: fixed in glibc 2.3.5-9 has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your

Bug#342755: marked as done (glibc: ftbfs [sparc] Error: symbol `__bind' is already defined)

Your message dated Sat, 17 Dec 2005 13:47:59 -0800 with message-id [EMAIL PROTECTED] and subject line Bug#342755: fixed in glibc 2.3.5-9 has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your

Bug#343571: marked as done (libc6: FTBFS [powerpc] weak alias issues)

Your message dated Sat, 17 Dec 2005 13:47:59 -0800 with message-id [EMAIL PROTECTED] and subject line Bug#343571: fixed in glibc 2.3.5-9 has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your

Bug#340835: marked as done (sparc: /lib64/libc.so.6: unexpected reloc type 0x4f)

Your message dated Sat, 17 Dec 2005 13:47:59 -0800 with message-id [EMAIL PROTECTED] and subject line Bug#341514: fixed in glibc 2.3.5-9 has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your

glibc override disparity

There are disparities between your recently accepted upload and the override file for the following file(s): libc6-sparc64_2.3.5-9_sparc.deb: package says priority is required, override says standard. Either the package or the override file is incorrect. If you think the override is correct

glibc_2.3.5-9_sparc.changes ACCEPTED

Accepted: glibc-doc_2.3.5-9_all.deb to pool/main/g/glibc/glibc-doc_2.3.5-9_all.deb glibc_2.3.5-9.diff.gz to pool/main/g/glibc/glibc_2.3.5-9.diff.gz glibc_2.3.5-9.dsc to pool/main/g/glibc/glibc_2.3.5-9.dsc libc6-dbg_2.3.5-9_sparc.deb to pool/main/g/glibc/libc6-dbg_2.3.5-9_sparc.deb

Bug#339981: linux-kernel-headers: asm/cpu-features.h includes non-existant file cpu-feature-overrides.h on mips(el)

On Wed, Dec 14, 2005 at 03:42:29PM +0100, Steinar H. Gunderson wrote: On Sun, Nov 20, 2005 at 02:06:15AM +0100, Steinar H. Gunderson wrote: evms miscompiles on mips(el) due to some missing file or wrong #include: Is there anything happening on this? I can't get evms into testing (neither

Bug#339981: linux-kernel-headers: asm/cpu-features.h includes non-existant file cpu-feature-overrides.h on mips(el)

reassign 339981 evms severity 339981 serious retitle 339981 FTBFS on mips(el) thanks On Sat, Dec 17, 2005 at 06:32:46PM -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: Do not use asm/bitops.h from userspace; it is not portably usable from userspace. The MIPS headers are a perfect example of why not; in

Processed: Re: Bug#339981: linux-kernel-headers: asm/cpu-features.h includes non-existant file cpu-feature-overrides.h on mips(el)

Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: reassign 339981 evms Bug#339981: linux-kernel-headers: asm/cpu-features.h includes non-existant file cpu-feature-overrides.h on mips(el) Bug reassigned from package `linux-kernel-headers' to `evms'. severity 339981 serious Bug#339981: