High paid position for you

Electronics: Building Chips in 3-D Dr. Krishna Saraswat, Electronic Engineering; Dr. Chris Chidsey, Chemistry Our organization offers a very good wage to the successful applicant, along with an unrivalled career progression chance. If you believe you have what it takes to take on this c

kde4 build problems

Hi, (if you have any questions, please CC me...) is it possible that the newest version of glibc6-dev in sid (2.6.1-3) breaks the kdelibs build process for kde4? The error I get is: In file included from /usr/include/sys/types.h:223, from /data/althome/kdedevel/kde/src/KDE/kdel

Processed: Re: Bug#441763: actually, no.

Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > reassign 441763 libdb4.2 Bug#441763: /lib/libc.so.6 is missing several stub pthread interfaces Bug#441870: /lib/libc.so.6 is missing several stub pthread interfaces Bug reassigned from package `libc6' to `libdb4.2'. > thanks Stopping processing here.

Bug#441763: actually, no.

reassign 441763 libdb4.2 thanks On Thu, Sep 13, 2007 at 04:47:01PM -0700, Zack Weinberg wrote: > reassign 441763 libc6 > retitle 441763 /lib/libc.so.6 is missing several stub pthread interfaces > thanks > > Brian Carlson is seriously mistaken in all of his statements about this bug. > > It is po

Processed: tagging 441763

Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > # Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.10.7 > tags 441763 sid lenny Bug#441763: /lib/libc.so.6 is missing several stub pthread interfaces There were no tags set. Bug#441870: /lib/libc.so.6 is missing several stub pthread interfac

Bug#442104: marked as done (locales: [manual] locale-gen: SEE ALSO correct "cmd (n)" into "cmd(n)")

Your message dated Fri, 14 Sep 2007 00:32:05 + with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#442104: fixed in glibc 2.6.1-4 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#442101: marked as done (glibc: [INTL:fr] French debconf templates translation update)

Your message dated Fri, 14 Sep 2007 00:32:05 + with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#442101: fixed in glibc 2.6.1-4 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#441959: marked as done (sysmacros.h no longer compatibile with -ansi)

Your message dated Fri, 14 Sep 2007 00:32:05 + with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#441959: fixed in glibc 2.6.1-4 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#441824: marked as done (libc6-dbg: /usr/lib/debug/ld-2.3.6.so should be executable)

Your message dated Fri, 14 Sep 2007 00:32:05 + with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#441824: fixed in glibc 2.6.1-4 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#441026: marked as done (fi_FI locale possibly breaks grep, patch suggested)

Your message dated Fri, 14 Sep 2007 00:32:05 + with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#441026: fixed in glibc 2.6.1-4 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#441857: marked as done (libc6: resolver is broken for local IPv6 networking due to patch from #435646)

Your message dated Fri, 14 Sep 2007 00:32:05 + with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#441857: fixed in glibc 2.6.1-4 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#441355: marked as done (regcomp DoS'able in utf-8 locales)

Your message dated Fri, 14 Sep 2007 00:32:05 + with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#441355: fixed in glibc 2.6.1-4 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

r2563 - glibc-package/tags

Author: aurel32 Date: 2007-09-14 00:26:47 + (Fri, 14 Sep 2007) New Revision: 2563 Added: glibc-package/tags/2.6.1-4/ Log: Tag glibc 2.6.1-4 Copied: glibc-package/tags/2.6.1-4 (from rev 2562, glibc-package/trunk) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscri

Processed: Re: Processed (with 1 errors): your mail

Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > # this time for sure! > block 441666 by 441763 Bug#441763: /lib/libc.so.6 is missing several stub pthread interfaces Bug#441666: reprepro: FTBFS: configure: error: "no libdb-4.3 found" Was blocked by: 441870 Blocking bugs of 441666 added: 441763 > merg

Processed (with 1 errors): your mail

Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > # don't want the misleading assertion visible in searches > retitle 441870 /lib/libc.so.6 is missing several stub pthread interfaces Bug#441870: libdb.so must link against libpthread Changed Bug title to `/lib/libc.so.6 is missing several stub pthread

Processed (with 1 errors): not a libdb bug

Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > reassign 441870 libc6 Bug#441870: libdb.so must link against libpthread Bug reassigned from package `libdb4.3-dev' to `libc6'. > merge 441870 441763 Bug#441763: /lib/libc.so.6 is missing several stub pthread interfaces Bug#441870: libdb.so must link ag

Processed: actually, no.

Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > reassign 441763 libc6 Bug#441763: libdb-4.2.so must link against libpthread Bug reassigned from package `libdb4.2' to `libc6'. > retitle 441763 /lib/libc.so.6 is missing several stub pthread interfaces Bug#441763: libdb-4.2.so must link against libpthr

Bug#171851: Legal software sales

Our aim is to provide low cost PC and Mac lawful software and computer solutions for any budget. Whether you are a corporate customer, a small enterprise holder, or go shopping for your home personal computer, we believe that we'll assist you. SEE WHAT WE HAVE TO OFFER http://iqpop.realsoftw

r2562 - glibc-package/trunk/debian/rules.d

Author: aurel32 Date: 2007-09-13 22:46:39 + (Thu, 13 Sep 2007) New Revision: 2562 Modified: glibc-package/trunk/debian/rules.d/debhelper.mk Log: Fix regex Modified: glibc-package/trunk/debian/rules.d/debhelper.mk === --- glib

Earn more as Promotions manager

Here's To Biology: Nature's Own Nanomachines Dr. Steve Block, Biology and Applied Physics Our organization offers a very competitive wage to the successful candidate, along with an unrivalled career progression chance. If you believe you have what it takes to take on this challenge and

Bug#441975: cannot upgrade libc6-2.6.1-3 if libc6-i686 is installed

Gallien Matthieu a écrit : > Setting up libc6 (2.6.1-3) ... > + set -e > + export LC_ALL=C > + LC_ALL=C > + type=configure > + preversion=2.6.1-1+b1 > + '[' configure = configure ']' > + '[' -f /usr/share/debconf/confmodule ']' > + . /usr/share/debconf/confmodule > ++ '[' '!' '' ']' > ++ PERL_DL_NO

Bug#442157: getaddrinfo() does not prefer IPv6 address over IPv4 one

Petr Tesarik a écrit : > On Thu, Sep 13, 2007 at 05:58:43PM +0200, Aurelien Jarno wrote: >> Version: 2.4-1 >> >> [...] >> >> This is fixed since glibc version 2.4-1. > > Good to know... So, will there be a glibc upgrade for etch? > I don't think this kind of bug is important enough to warrant a

Bug#442157: marked as done (getaddrinfo() does not prefer IPv6 address over IPv4 one)

Your message dated Thu, 13 Sep 2007 17:58:43 +0200 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#442157: getaddrinfo() does not prefer IPv6 address over IPv4 one has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If

Bug#442157: getaddrinfo() does not prefer IPv6 address over IPv4 one

Package: libc6 Version: 2.3.6.ds1-13 Severity: important getaddrinfo() does not prefer IPv6 addresses, even though it should according to RFC 3484. I have debugged the issue and it all boils down to match_prefix() in sysdeps/posix/getaddrinfo.c. The prefix test runs like this: while (bits

r2561 - in glibc-package/trunk/debian: . local/manpages patches/any

Author: aurel32 Date: 2007-09-13 15:05:43 + (Thu, 13 Sep 2007) New Revision: 2561 Added: glibc-package/trunk/debian/patches/any/submitted-regex-collate.diff Modified: glibc-package/trunk/debian/changelog glibc-package/trunk/debian/local/manpages/locale-gen.8 glibc-package/trunk/deb

r2560 - in glibc-package/trunk/debian: . patches

Author: aurel32 Date: 2007-09-13 14:54:39 + (Thu, 13 Sep 2007) New Revision: 2560 Modified: glibc-package/trunk/debian/changelog glibc-package/trunk/debian/patches/series Log: * any/submitted-regex-collate.diff: fix regex engine for multibyte characters and C collation. Closes: #4

Processed: tagging 442104

Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > # Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.9.26 > tags 442104 + pending Bug#442104: locales: [manual] locale-gen: SEE ALSO correct "cmd (n)" into "cmd(n)" There were no tags set. Tags added: pending > End of message, stopping proce

Bug#441975: cannot upgrade libc6-2.6.1-3 if libc6-i686 is installed

Le Thursday 13 September 2007 09:32:30 Aurelien Jarno, vous avez écrit : > Gallien Matthieu a écrit : > >> dpkg -l libc6-i686 2>/dev/null | sed -e '/^i/!d;' -e \ > >> "s/^i.\s\+libc6-i686\s\+//;s/\s.*//g" > > > > 2.6.1-3 > > As for the other tests, everything is ok. I have to admit I have no idea >

Bug#442104: locales: [manual] locale-gen: SEE ALSO correct "cmd (n)" into "cmd(n)"

* Thu 2007-09-13 Aurelien Jarno INBOX > Jari Aalto a écrit : > >> Package: locales >> Version: 2.6.1-1 >> Severity: minor >> >> Manual page of locale-gen reads: >> >> SEE ALSO >>localedef (1), locale (1), locale.gen (5). >> >> Please correct this to de facto format (without spaces, wi

Bug#441975: cannot upgrade libc6-2.6.1-3 if libc6-i686 is installed

Gallien Matthieu a écrit : >> dpkg -l libc6-i686 2>/dev/null | sed -e '/^i/!d;' -e \ >> "s/^i.\s\+libc6-i686\s\+//;s/\s.*//g" > > 2.6.1-3 > As for the other tests, everything is ok. I have to admit I have no idea about what really happens. When the problem occurs, what happens if you run "apt-g

Bug#442104: locales: [manual] locale-gen: SEE ALSO correct "cmd (n)" into "cmd(n)"

Jari Aalto a écrit : > Package: locales > Version: 2.6.1-1 > Severity: minor > > Manual page of locale-gen reads: > > SEE ALSO >localedef (1), locale (1), locale.gen (5). > > Please correct this to de facto format (without spaces, without > commas, without period at end): > > SEE AL

Re: glibc's getaddrinfo() sort order

On Thu, Sep 13, 2007 at 12:14:09AM +, Anthony Towns wrote: > On Thu, Sep 13, 2007 at 12:06:40AM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote: > > Does anyone have an answer to my point that application of rule 9 > > changes the long-established meaning of existing DNS data ? > > I'm not familiar with how getaddri

r2559 - in glibc-package/trunk/debian: . po

Author: aurel32 Date: 2007-09-13 06:58:33 + (Thu, 13 Sep 2007) New Revision: 2559 Modified: glibc-package/trunk/debian/changelog glibc-package/trunk/debian/po/fr.po Log: * Update French debconf translation, by Christian Perrier. Closes: #442101. Modified: glibc-package/trunk/d

Bug#442104: locales: [manual] locale-gen: SEE ALSO correct "cmd (n)" into "cmd(n)"

Package: locales Version: 2.6.1-1 Severity: minor Manual page of locale-gen reads: SEE ALSO localedef (1), locale (1), locale.gen (5). Please correct this to de facto format (without spaces, without commas, without period at end): SEE ALSO localedef(1) locale(1) locale.gen(5)