Source: util-linux
Version: 2.39.2-5
Severity: important
Tags: patch
User: debian-hurd@lists.debian.org
Usertags: hurd
X-Debbugs-CC: debian-hurd@lists.debian.org
Hi,
util-linux FTBFS on hurd-i386 (built in the past, last successful build was
2.39.1-4).
A patch enabling a successful build is
Hi all,
Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Chris Hofstaedtler (2020-05-03):
> > * Cyril Brulebois :
> > > Michael Biebl (2017-10-24):
> >
> > > > But there is one complication: I noticed that eject in util-linux
> > > > currently linux onl
hing from porters since 2017.
I actually hadn't noticed the mail, since both debian-boot and
debian-hurd mails fall into the same Debian mbox on my computer, and the
title wasn't enough to catch my eye.
Michael Biebl wrote:
> I noticed that eject in util-linux currently linux only.
Co
Hi,
Chris Hofstaedtler (2020-05-03):
> * Cyril Brulebois :
> > Michael Biebl (2017-10-24):
>
> > > But there is one complication: I noticed that eject in util-linux
> > > currently linux only.
> > >
> > > If we made the udeb linux-any, how wo
Hi,
* Cyril Brulebois :
> Michael Biebl (2017-10-24):
> > But there is one complication: I noticed that eject in util-linux
> > currently linux only.
> >
> > If we made the udeb linux-any, how would this affect the installer?
>
> It might mean a regression on
Svante Signell, le ven. 25 mai 2018 20:17:18 +0200, a ecrit:
> Typical of Redhat people
> to only think about Linux with systemd (and MS)
Such kind of comments are at best useless, and thus unwelcome.
Samuel
m
>
> Your fix should now be part of the latest upload (2.32-0.1),
> unfortunately there's another problem now.
>
> Any chance you can test if by any chance the following upstream commit
> fixes the (libmount-related) build issue on hurd (or if additional
> ups
now.
Any chance you can test if by any chance the following upstream commit
fixes the (libmount-related) build issue on hurd (or if additional
upstream fixing is needed for hurd)?
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/utils/util-linux/util-linux.git/commit/?id=061d1a51097c3c025ff46173f10aa135f9a610d4
Source: util-linux
Version: 2.31.1-0.4
Severity: important
Tags: upstream
Justification: fails to build from source (but built successfully in the past)
User: debian-hurd@lists.debian.org
Usertags: hurd
Builds of util-linux for hurd-i386 (admittedly not a release
architecture) have been failing
Michael Biebl (2017-10-26):
> The debconf templates are of course translated. What I meant is that I
> don't ship /usr/share/locale in the eject udeb.
I think I misread gettext as debconf when I received your mail, and I
really should have read it more thoroughly before replying.
> Or is it impo
Am 26.10.2017 um 16:59 schrieb Cyril Brulebois:
> Hi,
>
> Michael Biebl (2017-10-24):
>> It's actually smaller then the old eject-udeb as I didn't include the
>> gettext translations.
>
> Why? OK this was late and maybe I wasn't clear on IRC, but keeping the
> i18n + l10n part working is importa
I noticed that eject in util-linux
> currently linux only.
>
> If we made the udeb linux-any, how would this affect the installer?
It might mean a regression on kfreebsd-* (I don't see an eject-udeb binary
on hurd). I'm adding debian-bsd@ and debian-hurd@ in copy.
> KiBi,
Package: util-linux
Version: 2.28-1
Severity: important
Tags: patch
User: debian-...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: kfreebsd
Hi,
util-linux since 2.28 FTBFS on kfreebsd and hurd, because uuidd (daemon)
now depends on non-portable sys/signalfd.h
Please mark the binary as [linux-any] in the uuid
Justus Winter, le Mon 10 Nov 2014 19:11:36 +0100, a écrit :
> Quoting Samuel Thibault (2014-11-10 18:29:28)
> > Justus Winter, le Mon 10 Nov 2014 17:06:51 +0100, a écrit :
> > > Quoting Samuel Thibault (2014-11-09 02:23:13)
> > > > It seems the latest util-linux'
Quoting Samuel Thibault (2014-11-10 18:29:28)
> Justus Winter, le Mon 10 Nov 2014 17:06:51 +0100, a écrit :
> > Quoting Samuel Thibault (2014-11-09 02:23:13)
> > > It seems the latest util-linux' fdisk tool is broken on hurd-i386, it's
> > > not able to read p
Justus Winter, le Mon 10 Nov 2014 17:06:51 +0100, a écrit :
> Quoting Samuel Thibault (2014-11-09 02:23:13)
> > It seems the latest util-linux' fdisk tool is broken on hurd-i386, it's
> > not able to read partition tables.
>
> I saw fdisk failing too, but for m
Hey Samuel,
Quoting Samuel Thibault (2014-11-09 02:23:13)
> It seems the latest util-linux' fdisk tool is broken on hurd-i386, it's
> not able to read partition tables.
I saw fdisk failing too, but for me it works fine again:
# fdisk -l /dev/hd0
Disk /dev/hd0: 10 GiB, 1
Hello,
It seems the latest util-linux' fdisk tool is broken on hurd-i386, it's
not able to read partition tables.
Samuel
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-hurd-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian
As seen on IRC:
Hi. Just a short service announcement... the libmount/fsck
patches got merged upstream for the benefit of kFreeBSD. This will
mean that next upstream util-linux release will FTBFS on Hurd. See
https://lists.debian.org/debian-hurd/2014/08/msg00011.html for more details.
And also
Gabriele Giacone, le Mon 28 Jul 2014 18:45:40 +0200, a écrit :
> Andreas Henriksson (CC'ed) created some patches [0] to revive fsck in
> util-linux/experimental on kfreebsd and asked to test them on hurd.
> It builds and works by applying attached one.
>
> Any plan to a
Andreas Henriksson (CC'ed) created some patches [0] to revive fsck in
util-linux/experimental on kfreebsd and asked to test them on hurd.
It builds and works by applying attached one.
Any plan to also define UTIME_NOW/UTIME_OMIT?
[0] https://people.debian.org/~ah/ul-kfreebsd-fsck/
--
Hi,
On Tue, Aug 02, 2005 at 01:47:51AM +0200, Manuel Menal wrote:
> What is more annoying is that the newest util-linux package doesn't seem
> to build at all on Debian GNU/Hurd. Here is a sample output :
I ported it already some time ago, but the patch was so huge that the
Debian
Samuel Thibault wrote:
Hi,
Hello Samuel,
Manuel Menal, le Tue 02 Aug 2005 01:47:51 +0200, a écrit :
blockdev.c:72: error: `_IOT__IOTBASE_size_t' undeclared here (not in a
function)
This precise bug comes from a lack in
libc/sysdeps/mach/hurd/bits/ioctls.h: just add
#define _IOT__IOTBASE
Hi,
Manuel Menal, le Tue 02 Aug 2005 01:47:51 +0200, a écrit :
> blockdev.c:72: error: `_IOT__IOTBASE_size_t' undeclared here (not in a
> function)
This precise bug comes from a lack in
libc/sysdeps/mach/hurd/bits/ioctls.h: just add
#define _IOT__IOTBASE_size_t _IOT_SIMPLE (size_t)
in your
Hey,
It seems util-linux is uninstallable, which is not a great surprise
since quite everything is broken these days, what this the C++
transition and all. For the record, you need to edit debian/control to
change the build-dep to the new slang1 package name (libslang1-utf8-dev
instead of
On Thu, Jun 13, 2002 at 11:29:21PM -0700, James Morrison wrote:
> Well, it seems some programs have set a dependency on termios, so use termios
> and rip out the old termio craft.
I was going to do that but, was reluctant to rip some sort of "backward
compatibility" code :>, I will rip 'em all :P
--- Guillem Jover <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi list,
>
> I'm porting the util-linux package.
>
> The agetty program uses termio/termios conditionally, but doesn't
> compile on the Hurd, is wise a complete migration or should i try
> to make it compile co
Hi list,
I'm porting the util-linux package.
The agetty program uses termio/termios conditionally, but doesn't
compile on the Hurd, is wise a complete migration or should i try
to make it compile conditionally ? (some other programs on this package
use termios only).
I've used xg
[About porting util-linux]
On Sat, Jun 30, 2001 at 11:24:20AM +0800, Glenn Alexander wrote:
> Three possible results:
>
> 1) Programmer says: Nup (and we continue to port it ourselves).
>
> 2) Programmer says: Cool (I like to think this is probable)
>
> 3) Programmer sa
On Friday 29 June 2001 20:36, Paul Emsley wrote:
> > If stuff is that portable, shouldn't it be moved out of
> > util-linux and put with the general GNU utils??? My impression
> > from the previous posts is that util-linux is for
> > Linux-specifi
t;> Paul.
>>
>>
> If stuff is that portable, shouldn't it be moved out of
> util-linux and put with the general GNU utils??? My impression
> from the previous posts is that util-linux is for
> Linux-specific utils that are not portable to
Hello,
util-linux now does include bsdutils, *sigh*, which makes it harder for us
to get the few useful programs hidden there.
Someone needs to go through util-linux and look for the programs that can be
built on the Hurd (banner, more, ...). Then the build process needs to be
changed
32 matches
Mail list logo
