Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> reassign 425946 lib32ncurses5
Bug#425946: libc6-i386: install fails and breaks apt-get update
Bug reassigned from package `libc6-i386' to `lib32ncurses5'.
> thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
Debian bug trackin
reassign 425946 lib32ncurses5
thanks
Debian User a écrit :
> Package: libc6-i386
> Version: 2.5-8
> Severity: important
>
> Install fails with the following error:
>
> Preparing to replace libc6-i386 2.5-8 (using .../libc6-i386_2.5-9_amd64.deb)
> ...
> Unpacking replacement libc6-i386 ...
>
Package: libc6-i386
Version: 2.5-8
Severity: important
Install fails with the following error:
Preparing to replace libc6-i386 2.5-8 (using .../libc6-i386_2.5-9_amd64.deb)
...
Unpacking replacement libc6-i386 ...
dpkg: error processing /var/cache/apt/archives/libc6-i386_2.5-9_amd64.deb
(--un
Author: aurel32
Date: 2007-05-24 20:55:58 + (Thu, 24 May 2007)
New Revision: 2291
Modified:
glibc-package/branches/glibc-2.6/debian/patches/series
Log:
Fix patchlevel
Modified: glibc-package/branches/glibc-2.6/debian/patches/series
=
Author: aurel32
Date: 2007-05-24 20:52:11 + (Thu, 24 May 2007)
New Revision: 2290
Added:
glibc-package/branches/glibc-2.6/debian/patches/hppa/local-linuxthreads.diff
Modified:
glibc-package/branches/glibc-2.6/debian/changelog
glibc-package/branches/glibc-2.6/debian/patches/series
Log:
Author: aurel32
Date: 2007-05-24 20:49:19 + (Thu, 24 May 2007)
New Revision: 2289
Added:
glibc-package/branches/glibc-2.6/debian/patches/any/local-linuxthreads-fatalprepare.diff
glibc-package/branches/glibc-2.6/debian/patches/any/local-linuxthreads-lowlevellock.diff
Modified:
glibc-
Author: aurel32
Date: 2007-05-24 20:45:35 + (Thu, 24 May 2007)
New Revision: 2288
Added:
glibc-package/branches/glibc-2.6/debian/patches/any/cvs-malloc.diff
Modified:
glibc-package/branches/glibc-2.6/debian/changelog
glibc-package/branches/glibc-2.6/debian/patches/series
Log:
* patc
On Thu, May 24, 2007 at 11:17:10PM +0300, Wladimir Mutel wrote:
> I have K7 CPU. Lots of other my hosts have i686.
> Why upgrade to nscd 2.5-8 should bring libc6-amd64 with itself ?
It doesn't even have a dependency on libc6 (non-amd64), so I think
this must be a bug in the build proce
There are disparities between your recently accepted upload and the
override file for the following file(s):
libc6-i386_2.6-0exp1_amd64.deb: package says priority is optional, override
says standard.
Either the package or the override file is incorrect. If you think
the override is correct and
Accepted:
glibc-doc_2.6-0exp1_all.deb
to pool/main/g/glibc/glibc-doc_2.6-0exp1_all.deb
glibc_2.6-0exp1.diff.gz
to pool/main/g/glibc/glibc_2.6-0exp1.diff.gz
glibc_2.6-0exp1.dsc
to pool/main/g/glibc/glibc_2.6-0exp1.dsc
glibc_2.6.orig.tar.gz
to pool/main/g/glibc/glibc_2.6.orig.tar.gz
libc6-db
Package: nscd
Version: 2.5-8
Severity: normal
Hi,
I have K7 CPU. Lots of other my hosts have i686.
Why upgrade to nscd 2.5-8 should bring libc6-amd64 with itself ?
Are there really any benefits from this, even on x86_64 CPUs ?
What is so performance-critic
glibc_2.6-0exp1_amd64.changes uploaded successfully to localhost
along with the files:
glibc_2.6-0exp1.dsc
glibc_2.6.orig.tar.gz
glibc_2.6-0exp1.diff.gz
glibc-doc_2.6-0exp1_all.deb
locales_2.6-0exp1_all.deb
libc6_2.6-0exp1_amd64.deb
libc6-dev_2.6-0exp1_amd64.deb
libc6-prof_2.6-0exp1
Your message dated Thu, 24 May 2007 18:26:12 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#412562: fixed in glibc 2.3.6.ds1-13etch1
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 i
Your message dated Thu, 24 May 2007 18:26:12 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#369536: fixed in glibc 2.3.6.ds1-13etch1
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 i
Your message dated Thu, 24 May 2007 18:26:12 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#419459: fixed in glibc 2.3.6.ds1-13etch1
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 i
Your message dated Thu, 24 May 2007 18:26:12 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#413450: fixed in glibc 2.3.6.ds1-13etch1
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 i
Your message dated Thu, 24 May 2007 18:26:12 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#419459: fixed in glibc 2.3.6.ds1-13etch1
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 i
Your message dated Thu, 24 May 2007 18:26:12 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#325600: fixed in glibc 2.3.6.ds1-13etch1
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 i
Your message dated Thu, 24 May 2007 18:26:12 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#409288: fixed in glibc 2.3.6.ds1-13etch1
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 i
Your message dated Thu, 24 May 2007 18:26:14 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#423369: fixed in glibc 2.3.6.ds1-13etch2
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 i
Your message dated Thu, 24 May 2007 18:26:12 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#419459: fixed in glibc 2.3.6.ds1-13etch1
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 i
Accepted:
glibc-doc_2.3.6.ds1-13etch1_all.deb
to pool/main/g/glibc/glibc-doc_2.3.6.ds1-13etch1_all.deb
glibc_2.3.6.ds1-13etch1.diff.gz
to pool/main/g/glibc/glibc_2.3.6.ds1-13etch1.diff.gz
glibc_2.3.6.ds1-13etch1.dsc
to pool/main/g/glibc/glibc_2.3.6.ds1-13etch1.dsc
libc6-dbg_2.3.6.ds1-13etch1
Accepted:
glibc-doc_2.3.6.ds1-13etch2_all.deb
to pool/main/g/glibc/glibc-doc_2.3.6.ds1-13etch2_all.deb
glibc_2.3.6.ds1-13etch2.diff.gz
to pool/main/g/glibc/glibc_2.3.6.ds1-13etch2.diff.gz
glibc_2.3.6.ds1-13etch2.dsc
to pool/main/g/glibc/glibc_2.3.6.ds1-13etch2.dsc
libc6-dbg_2.3.6.ds1-13etch2
reassign 425799 lib32ncurses5
close 425799 5.6-3
thanks
On Thu, May 24, 2007 at 10:23:15AM -0700, Joshua Kwan wrote:
> reopen 425799
> reassign 425799 libc6-i386
> thanks homeboy
> On Thu, May 24, 2007 at 06:51:10AM +, Daniel Baumann wrote:
> > This was fixed as of ncurses 5.6-3.
>
> I under
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> reassign 425799 lib32ncurses5
Bug#425799: libc6-i386 tries to overwrite /lib32 symlink made by ncurses
Bug reassigned from package `libc6-i386' to `lib32ncurses5'.
> close 425799 5.6-3
Bug#425799: libc6-i386 tries to overwrite /lib32 symlink made by nc
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> reopen 425799
Bug#425799: libc6-i386 tries to overwrite /lib32 symlink made by ncurses
Bug reopened, originator not changed.
> reassign 425799 libc6-i386
Bug#425799: libc6-i386 tries to overwrite /lib32 symlink made by ncurses
Bug reassigned from packa
reopen 425799
reassign 425799 libc6-i386
thanks homeboy
On Thu, May 24, 2007 at 06:51:10AM +, Daniel Baumann wrote:
> This was fixed as of ncurses 5.6-3.
I understand, but this happened in an upgrade situation wherein:
libc6-i386 was scheduled to be upgraded to 2.5-9
lib32ncurses5 was schedu
On 5/23/07, Ivan Baldo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hello.
When will the new GLibC 2.5 migrate to Testing?
I am not subscribed to this mailing list, so please send me a copy
of your reply.
Thanks for the info!
Russ Allbery said:
"...most packages are blocked behind glibc 2.5, whi
Author: aurel32
Date: 2007-05-24 14:34:39 + (Thu, 24 May 2007)
New Revision: 2287
Modified:
glibc-package/branches/glibc-2.6/debian/patches/sparc/local-undefined-registers.diff
Log:
Fix local-undefined-registers.diff once again
Modified:
glibc-package/branches/glibc-2.6/debian/patches/s
Author: aurel32
Date: 2007-05-24 12:50:31 + (Thu, 24 May 2007)
New Revision: 2286
Modified:
glibc-package/branches/glibc-2.6/debian/changelog
glibc-package/branches/glibc-2.6/debian/debhelper.in/libc.preinst
glibc-package/branches/glibc-2.6/debian/local/etc_init.d/glibc.sh
glibc-pa
Author: aurel32
Date: 2007-05-24 12:36:53 + (Thu, 24 May 2007)
New Revision: 2285
Modified:
glibc-package/branches/glibc-2.6/debian/changelog
Log:
Use a new tarball
Modified: glibc-package/branches/glibc-2.6/debian/changelog
Author: aurel32
Date: 2007-05-24 12:36:05 + (Thu, 24 May 2007)
New Revision: 2284
Removed:
glibc-package/trunk/debian/patches/sparc/local-undefined-registers.diff
Log:
Revert commit 2282
Deleted: glibc-package/trunk/debian/patches/sparc/local-undefined-registers.diff
=
Author: aurel32
Date: 2007-05-24 12:34:47 + (Thu, 24 May 2007)
New Revision: 2283
Modified:
glibc-package/branches/glibc-2.6/debian/patches/sparc/local-undefined-registers.diff
Log:
Fix sparc/local-undefined-registers.diff on the *experimental* tree
Modified:
glibc-package/branches/glib
Author: aurel32
Date: 2007-05-24 12:33:28 + (Thu, 24 May 2007)
New Revision: 2282
Added:
glibc-package/trunk/debian/patches/sparc/local-undefined-registers.diff
Log:
Fix sparc/local-undefined-registers.diff
Added: glibc-package/trunk/debian/patches/sparc/local-undefined-registers.diff
===
reassign 425812 lib32ncurses5
severity 425812 grave
thanks
On Thu, May 24, 2007 at 09:25:56AM +0100, Peter Simpson wrote:
> Package: libc6-i386
> Version: 2.5-8
> Severity: normal
>
>
> Upgrading this morning produces the following problems:
>
> trying to overwrite `/lib32', which is also in pa
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> reassign 425812 lib32ncurses5
Bug#425812: libc6-i386: trying to overwrite `/lib32', which is also in package
lib32ncurses5
Bug reassigned from package `libc6-i386' to `lib32ncurses5'.
> severity 425812 grave
Bug#425812: libc6-i386: trying to overwrite
On Wed, May 23, 2007 at 01:42:35PM -0700, Andrew T. Young wrote:
> Package: libc6-i686
> Version: 2.3.6.ds1-13
> Severity: normal
>
>
> When running a program under the valgrind memory-allocation debugger,
> I got the following error messages:
>
> --3777-- Reading syms from /lib/tls/i686/cmov/li
On Thu, May 24, 2007 at 07:52:51AM +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> ++objdump -T $@ | grep -v 'D. \*UND\*' cmp -s /dev/null -
That's got to be missing a pipe before cmp, did you try it?
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "uns
Your message dated Thu, 24 May 2007 10:48:29 +0200
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line libc6-i386: trying to overwrite `/lib32', which is also in
package lib32ncurses5
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dea
Package: libc6-i386
Version: 2.5-8
Severity: normal
Upgrading this morning produces the following problems:
trying to overwrite `/lib32', which is also in package lib32ncurses5
Unpacking replacement libc6-i386 ...
dpkg: error processing
/var/cache/apt/archives/libc6-i386_2.5-9_amd64.deb (--unpa
Author: aurel32
Date: 2007-05-24 07:52:50 + (Thu, 24 May 2007)
New Revision: 2281
Added:
glibc-package/branches/glibc-2.6/debian/patches/sparc/local-undefined-registers.diff
Modified:
glibc-package/branches/glibc-2.6/debian/changelog
glibc-package/branches/glibc-2.6/debian/patches/se
41 matches
Mail list logo
