On Mon, Jul 17, 2006 at 01:18:41PM +, Marc Brockschmidt wrote:
There was a new request for another approved release goal, that is NFS
v4 support. We approved that goal.
AFAICS, that goal has been completed for a while. What's needed in etch is:
- nfs-utils 1.0.7 or newer (check, 1.0.9 is
On Mon, Jul 17, 2006 at 05:06:49PM +, Marc Brockschmidt [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
(...)
Etch will carry 4.0 as version number.
Just out of curiosity, what is the rationale behind the major version change ?
(...)
And these release goals currently:
- - LSB 3.1 compatibility
- - SELinux
Mike Hommey wrote:
[snip]
The problem here is that the buildd in question is running a 64bit
kernel while building 32bit binaries. The same problem would happen if
building i386 binaries on amd64 buildds. Now my question is: could these
bugs be treated ignore-etch ? It's indeed RC, but is it
On Mon, Jul 17, 2006 at 07:53:55PM +0200, Mike Hommey wrote:
If it is the case,
someone with an amd64 or a sparc64 or anything that can do bi-arch
should try to build the whole archive to find those packages that have
the problem.
I already
* Mike Hommey [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2006-07-17 19:53]:
The problem here is that the buildd in question is running a 64bit
kernel while building 32bit binaries. The same problem would happen if
building i386 binaries on amd64 buildds. Now my question is: could these
bugs be treated ignore-etch ?
* Bastian Blank [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2006-07-17 20:31]:
I already asked tbm to do a rebuild with the machinetype set to
unknown. This will break also anything which uses autoconf but
forget to provide the --build parameter.
Daniel Priem kindly gave me access to a 10 CPU SPARC box the other
day,
On Mon, Jul 17, 2006 at 09:23:02PM +0200, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
It's not even RC at all, just a badly configured buildd. They should
be using linux32.
No, it is configured correctly. The buildd provides a build environment
which matches the standard configuration for this architecture.
On Mon, Jul 17, 2006 at 10:06:19PM +0200, Bastian Blank [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Mon, Jul 17, 2006 at 09:23:02PM +0200, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
It's not even RC at all, just a badly configured buildd. They should
be using linux32.
No, it is configured correctly. The buildd provides a
Mike Hommey wrote:
On Mon, Jul 17, 2006 at 10:06:19PM +0200, Bastian Blank [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Mon, Jul 17, 2006 at 09:23:02PM +0200, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
It's not even RC at all, just a badly configured buildd. They should
be using linux32.
No, it is configured
On Mon, Jul 17, 2006 at 09:39:37PM +0100, Thiemo Seufer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Mike Hommey wrote:
On Mon, Jul 17, 2006 at 10:06:19PM +0200, Bastian Blank [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Mon, Jul 17, 2006 at 09:23:02PM +0200, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
It's not even RC at all, just a badly
10 matches
Mail list logo
