Am Dienstag, 29. August 2006 00:09 schrieb Tom Eastep:
> Eric Spakman wrote:
> > Hello Tom,
> >
> > That's great news! Thank you very much!
>
> You're welcome, Eric.
>
> Note that I'm leaving the separate packaging of the individual libraries to
> the embedded distros like Bering; the packages that
Eric Spakman wrote:
> Hello Tom,
>
> That's great news! Thank you very much!
>
You're welcome, Eric.
Note that I'm leaving the separate packaging of the individual libraries to the
embedded distros like Bering; the packages that I release will always contain
the full set of the libraries in as
Hello Tom,
That's great news! Thank you very much!
Eric Spakman
> I have opened up the 3.3 development thread.
>
>
> http://www1.shorewall.net/pub/shorewall/development/3.3/shorewall-3.3.0
> ftp://ftp1.shorewall.net/pub/shorewall/development/3.3/shorewall-3.3.0
>
>
> The two major changes in 3.3
I have opened up the 3.3 development thread.
http://www1.shorewall.net/pub/shorewall/development/3.3/shorewall-3.3.0
ftp://ftp1.shorewall.net/pub/shorewall/development/3.3/shorewall-3.3.0
The two major changes in 3.3.0 when compared to 3.2.3 are:
a) I have finished the code consolidation that I
Hi Erich,
> OK, i have to admit it, I do not grok this buildtool.
>
> What is the canonical way to get up to date without building buildenv
> again?
There is no canonical way. The short version is that there simply isn't
any way to get the buildenv up to date, because it would most likely
caus
Hi
OK, i have to admit it, I do not grok this buildtool.
What is the canonical way to get up to date without building buildenv
again? I tried to just get everything from CVS, but definitely the
kernel sources still were 2.4.32 :-(
So back I went and rebuilt the whole buildenv from scratch, but I
Hi Erich,
> BTW. does anyone know why S/MIME signed messages are _not_ showing up on
> the list?
most likely because the messages had a content type other than
multipart/mixed
multipart/alternative
message/rfc822
multipart/signed
text/plain
Please send a signed message to leaf-devel again (I chang
Hi Erich,
>>
>> It's probably your version of jade.
>>
>
> Most probably. I did not run buildenv this time, is there a new version
> of jade built in the buildenv?
>
No, this source uses jade from your hostsystem if it exists. It probably
exists on your system and found by libusb's configure script
Eric
Eric Spakman wrote:
> Hi Erich,
>
> It's probably your version of jade.
Most probably. I did not run buildenv this time, is there a new version
of jade built in the buildenv?
Try to change libusb buildtool.mk file
> like this:
>
> Change:
> ./configure)
> to
> ./configure --disable-bui
Hi Erich,
It's probably your version of jade. Try to change libusb buildtool.mk file
like this:
Change:
./configure)
to
./configure --disable-build-docs)
Eric
> Hi
>
>
> Maybe I blew it again, altough I thought upgrading my development
> environment was easy
>
> - I checked out the latest cvs
Hi
Maybe I blew it again, altough I thought upgrading my development
environment was easy
- I checked out the latest cvs version to an existing tree
- I ran 'buildtool.pl build', hoping the dependencies would be solved
correctly
build source/package: libusb
ca
This is just a test for the list access, please ignore
-
Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security?
Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier
Download IBM Web
12 matches
Mail list logo
