Re: Multiarch support (was Moving 32-bit libraries to (/usr)/lib32 on amd64)

2006-02-24 Thread Christian Perrier
(restricting the CC list to real lists) Quoting Steve Langasek ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): > On Fri, Feb 24, 2006 at 07:45:16AM +0100, Christian Perrier wrote: > > > > After a discussion on IRC, it seems there is no consensus about how > > > multiarch should be done. Therefore I stop working on that (p

Re: Multiarch support (was Moving 32-bit libraries to (/usr)/lib32 on amd64)

2006-02-24 Thread Steve Langasek
On Fri, Feb 24, 2006 at 07:45:16AM +0100, Christian Perrier wrote: > > After a discussion on IRC, it seems there is no consensus about how > > multiarch should be done. Therefore I stop working on that (patches are > > still welcome for glibc). > Is this really the best thing to do? > Even tho

Bug#354292: turns out iconv's -t was optional all along

2006-02-24 Thread Dan Jacobson
Package: libc6 Version: 2.3.5-8.1 Severity: normal File: /usr/share/man/man1/iconv.1.gz On the iconv man page, why don't you please mention that one can leave off the -t, and it apparently will use LC_something for it, I discovered by accident, saving us tons of typing over a lifetime. BTW, SYNOP

r1239 - glibc-package/trunk/debian

2006-02-24 Thread Denis Barbier
Author: barbier Date: 2006-02-24 22:41:14 + (Fri, 24 Feb 2006) New Revision: 1239 Modified: glibc-package/trunk/debian/changelog Log: Remove bug closer, this bug is already closed. Modified: glibc-package/trunk/debian/changelog =

r1238 - in glibc-package/trunk/debian: . po

2006-02-24 Thread Denis Barbier
Author: barbier Date: 2006-02-24 21:51:46 + (Fri, 24 Feb 2006) New Revision: 1238 Modified: glibc-package/trunk/debian/changelog glibc-package/trunk/debian/po/it.po Log: Updated Italian debconf translation, by Luca Monducci. (Closes: #353611) Modified: glibc-package/trunk/debian/chang

r1237 - glibc-package/trunk/debian

2006-02-24 Thread Denis Barbier
Author: barbier Date: 2006-02-24 21:50:56 + (Fri, 24 Feb 2006) New Revision: 1237 Modified: glibc-package/trunk/debian/changelog glibc-package/trunk/debian/locales-depver Log: Bump LOCALES_DEP_VER to 2.3.6-2. All locales can be compiled with localedef from 2.3.6-2 and 2.3.6-3. (Closes:

r1236 - in glibc-package/trunk/debian: . patches patches/locale patches/localedata

2006-02-24 Thread Denis Barbier
Author: barbier Date: 2006-02-24 21:49:39 + (Fri, 24 Feb 2006) New Revision: 1236 Added: glibc-package/trunk/debian/patches/localedata/locale-ro_RO.diff Modified: glibc-package/trunk/debian/changelog glibc-package/trunk/debian/patches/locale/iso4217-RON.diff glibc-package/trunk/deb

Bug#354241: marked as done (libc6: Dynamic loader doesn't support R_PARISC_PLABEL21L and R_PARISC_PLABEL14R)

2006-02-24 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
-lgcc --as-needed -lgcc_s - -no-as-needed /usr/lib/gcc/hppa-linux-gnu/4.0.3/crtendS.o /usr/lib/gcc/hppa-linu x-gnu/4.0.3/../../../crtn.o GNU ld version 2.16.91 20060224 The problematic relocations come from here: [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/binutils-2.16.91/objdir/ld$ objdump -r /usr/lib/Scrt1.o|less

Bug#353611: Please update debconf PO translation for the package glibc 2.3.6-2

2006-02-24 Thread Luca Monducci
On Monday, February 20, 2006 at 22.27.03, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > You are noted as the last translator of the debconf translation for > glibc. The English template has been changed, and now some messages > are marked "fuzzy" in your translation or are missing. > I would be grateful if you could

Bug#354241: libc6: Dynamic loader doesn't support R_PARISC_PLABEL21L and R_PARISC_PLABEL14R

2006-02-24 Thread John David Anglin
GNU ld version 2.16.91 20060224 The problematic relocations come from here: [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/binutils-2.16.91/objdir/ld$ objdump -r /usr/lib/Scrt1.o|less /usr/lib/Scrt1.o: file format elf32-hppa-linux RELOCATION RECORDS FOR [.text]: OFFSET TYPE VALUE R_PARISC_PLA

Bug#337368: marked as done (libc6: New upstream version 2.3.6 released)

2006-02-24 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Your message dated Fri, 24 Feb 2006 17:30:58 +0100 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#337368: libc6: New upstream version 2.3.6 release 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

Bug#174270: libc6: debians i386 build of glibc incompatible with coroutines

2006-02-24 Thread Aurelien Jarno
Note that this bug is fixed if you are using a 2.6 kernel. The libc6 package provides an NPTL version of the GNU libc, which is used when running a 2.6 kernel. It is built with MIN_KERNEL_SUPPORTED=2.6. -- .''`. Aurelien Jarno | GPG: 1024D/F1BCDB73 : :' : Debian developer

r1235 - in glibc-package/trunk/debian: . control.in rules.d sysdeps

2006-02-24 Thread Aurelien Jarno
Author: aurel32 Date: 2006-02-24 16:00:22 + (Fri, 24 Feb 2006) New Revision: 1235 Added: glibc-package/trunk/debian/control.in/powerpc glibc-package/trunk/debian/sysdeps/ppc64.mk Modified: glibc-package/trunk/debian/changelog glibc-package/trunk/debian/control glibc-package/trun

r1234 - in glibc-package/trunk/debian: . debhelper.in local/usr_sbin

2006-02-24 Thread Clint Adams
Author: schizo Date: 2006-02-24 15:18:03 + (Fri, 24 Feb 2006) New Revision: 1234 Modified: glibc-package/trunk/debian/changelog glibc-package/trunk/debian/debhelper.in/libc.postinst glibc-package/trunk/debian/local/usr_sbin/tzconfig Log: * Get rid of -o as a binary operator to [ in

Bug#325463: marked as done (glibc: [Patch] Allow for multiarch libraries)

2006-02-24 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Your message dated Fri, 24 Feb 2006 16:34:45 +0100 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#325463: glibc: [Patch] Allow for multiarch libraries 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 t

r1233 - in glibc-package/trunk/debian: . rules.d sysdeps

2006-02-24 Thread Aurelien Jarno
Author: aurel32 Date: 2006-02-24 14:38:44 + (Fri, 24 Feb 2006) New Revision: 1233 Modified: glibc-package/trunk/debian/changelog glibc-package/trunk/debian/rules.d/build.mk glibc-package/trunk/debian/sysdeps/amd64.mk Log: * Use a shell function instead of ifneq when testing a variabl

Re: Multiarch support (was Moving 32-bit libraries to (/usr)/lib32on amd64)

2006-02-24 Thread Andreas Jochens
Hello, On 06-Feb-24 14:04, Aurelien Jarno wrote: > Andreas Jochens a écrit : > When I say linking, I don't speak about the dynamic linking, but the > linking that occurs when building a package with gcc. > > >because /emul/ia32-linux/usr/lib is added to /etc/ld.so.conf by > >ia32-libs.postinst.

Re: Multiarch support (was Moving 32-bit libraries to (/usr)/lib32on amd64)

2006-02-24 Thread Aurelien Jarno
Andreas Jochens a écrit : On 06-Feb-24 12:06, Aurelien Jarno wrote: Andreas Jochens a écrit : I suggest the following setup for 32-bit libraries on amd64: 1. The ia32-libs package continues to install the 32-bit libraries in /emul/ia32-linux/usr/lib but it stops to provide the 32-bit libc6(

Re: Multiarch support (was Moving 32-bit libraries to (/usr)/lib32on amd64)

2006-02-24 Thread Andreas Jochens
On 06-Feb-24 12:06, Aurelien Jarno wrote: > Andreas Jochens a écrit : > >I suggest the following setup for 32-bit libraries on amd64: > > > >1. The ia32-libs package continues to install the 32-bit libraries in > >/emul/ia32-linux/usr/lib but it stops to provide the 32-bit libc6(-dev) > >packages

RE: Spyware Stormer Support Request

2006-02-24 Thread Spyware Stormer
Dear Spyware Stormer Customer, Thank you for contacting our support department. Your email was received and your request is currently being processed. The average response time for support inquiries is 24 business hours. During this time, please review the list of frequently experienced problems

Re: Multiarch support (was Moving 32-bit libraries to (/usr)/lib32on amd64)

2006-02-24 Thread Aurelien Jarno
Andreas Jochens a écrit : Matthias Klose wrote: Bdale Garbee writes: On Fri, 2006-02-24 at 01:12 +0100, Aurelien Jarno wrote: The only change planned is to make libc6-dev-i386 and libc6-i386 provide a glibc on amd64 instead of ia32-libs. It will be in /emul/ia32-linux (I still have to fin

Re: compiling libc with --disable-hidden-plt

2006-02-24 Thread GOTO Masanori
At Thu, 23 Feb 2006 10:46:25 +0100, Andrea Gasparini wrote: > i'm at first post in this list, and i'm searching for a solution to one > problem, so excuse me if it's not pefectly in topic here... > > So, this is the problem: > i want to wrap almost all system call with LD_PRELOAD, and i would lik

Re: Multiarch support (was Moving 32-bit libraries to (/usr)/lib32on amd64)

2006-02-24 Thread Andreas Jochens
Matthias Klose wrote: > Bdale Garbee writes: > > On Fri, 2006-02-24 at 01:12 +0100, Aurelien Jarno wrote: > > > > > The only change planned is to make libc6-dev-i386 and libc6-i386 provide > > > a glibc on amd64 instead of ia32-libs. It will be in /emul/ia32-linux (I > > > still have to find how

Bug#353031: posix_fadvise defines missing

2006-02-24 Thread GOTO Masanori
At 16 Feb 2006 13:00:08 -0500, Greg Stark wrote: > > The man pages come from manpages-dev. > > It seems like the necessary #defines should be included in each man page along > with the necessary #includes. I suspect I'll be tilting at windmills trying to > convince people of this though. Can we r

Bug#227386: libc6-dev: ENOTSUP==EOPNOTSUPP, which violates SUSv3

2006-02-24 Thread Brian M. Carlson
On Thu, 2006-02-23 at 13:24 +0100, Gabor Gombas wrote: > On Thu, Feb 23, 2006 at 04:30:55AM +, Brian M. Carlson wrote: > > > > By introducing a new define, you are breaking standard compliance. > > > > Well, there is no better way. You want to preserve binary compatibility > > at the expense

Re: glibc 2.3.6-3

2006-02-24 Thread GOTO Masanori
At Thu, 23 Feb 2006 22:43:26 +0100, Aurelien Jarno wrote: > I have just uploaded glibc 2.3.6-2. It is now time to think to the next > upload, glibc 2.3.6-3. Gook work! > Personally here is the things I would like to see in it: > > - Split of libc6 and libc6-dev into libraries and binaries. This

Bug#347173: glibc: Romanian days are written with mixed case letters/Romanian alplhabet reordered

2006-02-24 Thread Eddy Petrişor
On 2/24/06, Eddy Petrişor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > All the locales were tested [snip] I have observed that 'cal' does not take into account the first_weekday/first_workday data. Is this a cal bug? (I know there is an option of cal to display the first week day as Monday, but that is another is

Bug#347173: glibc: Romanian days are written with mixed case letters/Romanian alplhabet reordered

2006-02-24 Thread Eddy Petrişor
On 2/23/06, Denis Barbier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, Feb 23, 2006 at 02:39:46PM +0200, Eddy Petrişor wrote: > > I managed to do it today, so here it is (hopefully) the final version > > of the patch for locale ro_RO. > > > > This fixes also: > > + * locales/ro_RO: first_weekday and fi