with NetBSD-native
configs; the NetBSD kernel stuff just ain't that exciting, and it still has
a GNU userland, just not a GNU libc).
--
Joel Baker [EMAIL PROTECTED],''`.
Debian GNU/kNetBSD(i386) porter
it. As long g++ was used, it should be ok.
I'll test this on GNU/kFreeBSD and commit.
*dons part-time Debian GCC Debian X committer hats together*
This looks correct from past work on the NetBSD patches, and using g++
rather than -lstdc++ is *absolutely* the correct solution.
--
Joel Baker
to
point out that Robert's k*BSD.cf (Glibc-based) and the Nienna set (NetBSD
libc based) have some very different choices for certain options - and a
huge set of similarities to the current GNU, Linux, etc, files as Debian
patches them.
--
Joel Baker [EMAIL PROTECTED
; it's my on-call week for work,
and Murphy (as in the bastard with the law, not the machine) has been,
well, a right bastard.
gruntNo objections. May $DEITY have pity on your soul./grunt
--
Joel Baker [EMAIL PROTECTED],''`.
Debian GNU/NetBSD(i386) porter
.
--
Joel Baker [EMAIL PROTECTED],''`.
Debian GNU/NetBSD(i386) porter
-clause stuff for the
NetBSD codebase, I could possibly raise the issue of the XFree86 license
texts at the same time, if you wish.
--
Joel Baker [EMAIL PROTECTED],''`.
Debian GNU/NetBSD(i386) porter
something fundamentally antithetical to the user's stated request for
UTF-8, simply because some fonts claiming to be intended for Unicode fail
to provide a useful set of Unicode entries.
--
Joel Baker [EMAIL PROTECTED],''`.
Debian GNU NetBSD/i386 porter
funds for #1 and caused delays in #2 slowing down
enough to permit more Debian work again).
And then I get to figure out how to make subversion do the Right Thing,
which is something I should probably be figuring out anyway. :)
--
Joel Baker [EMAIL PROTECTED
funds for #1 and caused delays in #2 slowing down
enough to permit more Debian work again).
And then I get to figure out how to make subversion do the Right Thing,
which is something I should probably be figuring out anyway. :)
--
Joel Baker [EMAIL PROTECTED
Well, mutt-utf8 + mlterm certainly agrees that it's valid UTF-8. Nice to
know nothing else is mangling it on the way through. :)
--
Joel Baker [EMAIL PROTECTED],''`.
Debian GNU NetBSD/i386 porter
Well, mutt-utf8 + mlterm certainly agrees that it's valid UTF-8. Nice to
know nothing else is mangling it on the way through. :)
--
Joel Baker [EMAIL PROTECTED],''`.
Debian GNU NetBSD/i386 porter
-trivial
tasks facing a new port :)
--
Joel Baker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-trivial
tasks facing a new port :)
--
Joel Baker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
pgpjJgpHPMLT7.pgp
Description: PGP signature
is even more reason to split
the Debian-specific bits into a different file from the GNU-specific bits.
--
Joel Baker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
pgpeU4hmexE5l.pgp
Description: PGP signature
, but I'll try to dig out the log and provide more details.
--
Joel Baker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature
is even more reason to split
the Debian-specific bits into a different file from the GNU-specific bits.
--
Joel Baker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature
issues with some bits
of toolchain sanity that's filed upstream, and we can't do a whole lot
until that's fixed (or at least, doing it is relatively pointless, unless
it's a new patchset, since it won't produce useable results).
--
Joel Baker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
pgpHqsp50E2ro.pgp
Description: PGP
, but this one sort of changed the intent
of the statement...
--
Joel Baker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature
, but this one sort of changed the intent
of the statement...
--
Joel Baker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
pgpbPgAbrAF9F.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Tue, Oct 08, 2002 at 01:33:38PM -0600, Joel Baker wrote:
The good:
The better: I now have patches (against 4.2.1-1) to get a clean build on
netbsd-i386. Not yet tested extensively, but it *builds*.
The bad:
That I need to arrange them into a sane set of patches and submit them,
yet
) will be submitted in a separate bug.
--
***
Joel Baker System Administrator - lightbearer.com
[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://users.lightbearer.com/lucifer/
Patch to imake.c for Debian/NetBSD support
'.
--
***
Joel Baker System Administrator - lightbearer.com
[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://users.lightbearer.com/lucifer/
This is an omnibus patch to add support for Debian-specific values
be... augh. I'd have to start pulling
my hair out.
--
***
Joel Baker System Administrator - lightbearer.com
[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://users.lightbearer.com/lucifer/
pgpqbKHpVfCGy.pgp
On Tue, Oct 08, 2002 at 01:33:38PM -0600, Joel Baker wrote:
The good:
The better: I now have patches (against 4.2.1-1) to get a clean build on
netbsd-i386. Not yet tested extensively, but it *builds*.
The bad:
That I need to arrange them into a sane set of patches and submit them,
yet
'.
--
***
Joel Baker System Administrator - lightbearer.com
[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://users.lightbearer.com/lucifer/
This is an omnibus patch to add support for Debian-specific values
be... augh. I'd have to start pulling
my hair out.
--
***
Joel Baker System Administrator - lightbearer.com
[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://users.lightbearer.com/lucifer/
msg04116/pgp0
somewhere; I haven't dug into it yet.
--
***
Joel Baker System Administrator - lightbearer.com
[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://users.lightbearer.com/lucifer/
pgpwUje5QCnny.pgp
Description: PGP
On Tue, Oct 08, 2002 at 05:04:18PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
On Tue, Oct 08, 2002 at 01:33:38PM -0600, Joel Baker wrote:
The good:
After a bit of banging on things to force the circular dependancy path
between freetype and xfree86, and cribbing from the patches written
On Tue, Oct 08, 2002 at 08:07:39PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
On Tue, Oct 08, 2002 at 04:45:18PM -0600, Joel Baker wrote:
@@ -356,0 +355 @@
+usr/X11R6/bin/kbd_mode
I used to see this on Sun machines. You sure it's necessary with modern
BSD kernels?
I'm not sure
somewhere; I haven't dug into it yet.
--
***
Joel Baker System Administrator - lightbearer.com
[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://users.lightbearer.com/lucifer/
msg04036/pgp0.pgp
Description
On Tue, Oct 08, 2002 at 05:04:18PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
On Tue, Oct 08, 2002 at 01:33:38PM -0600, Joel Baker wrote:
The good:
After a bit of banging on things to force the circular dependancy path
between freetype and xfree86, and cribbing from the patches written
On Tue, Oct 08, 2002 at 08:07:39PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
On Tue, Oct 08, 2002 at 04:45:18PM -0600, Joel Baker wrote:
@@ -356,0 +355 @@
+usr/X11R6/bin/kbd_mode
I used to see this on Sun machines. You sure it's necessary with modern
BSD kernels?
I'm not sure
appears to have never been added to the
BSD ruleset, making it impossible to compile cleanly using GCC 3.x (libGLU
is linked without a dependancy on libstdc++, and any attempt to compile a
normal C program which calls libGLU will fail).
Patch authored by Joel Baker [EMAIL PROTECTED], based
33 matches
Mail list logo
