Dnia 06-03-2007, wto o godzinie 01:14 +0100, Szymon Siwek napisał(a):
> It's definitely gcc-4.2 related (th-i686)
What about gcc-4.1.2?
--
__("< Marcin Kowalczyk
\__/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
^^ http://qrnik.knm.org.pl/~qrczak/
_
On Mon, Mar 05, 2007 at 10:36:41PM +0100, Arkadiusz Miskiewicz wrote:
> On Monday 05 of March 2007, Adam Gołębiowski wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 05, 2007 at 11:03:23PM +0200, Elan Ruusamäe wrote:
> > > there's OOo 2.1.0-0.m6 in ac-i586, ac-i686 ready trees
> > >
> > > happy testing!
> >
> > Kudos!
>
>
On Monday 05 of March 2007, Adam Gołębiowski wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 05, 2007 at 11:03:23PM +0200, Elan Ruusamäe wrote:
> > there's OOo 2.1.0-0.m6 in ac-i586, ac-i686 ready trees
> >
> > happy testing!
>
> Kudos!
I have Th version for amd64, too (built in current enviroment). Unfortunately
there is
On Mon, Mar 05, 2007 at 11:03:23PM +0200, Elan Ruusamäe wrote:
> there's OOo 2.1.0-0.m6 in ac-i586, ac-i686 ready trees
>
> happy testing!
Kudos!
Thanks.
--
http://www.mysza.eu.org/ | Everybody needs someone sure, someone true,
PLD Linux developer| Everybody needs some solid rock, I kn
there's OOo 2.1.0-0.m6 in ac-i586, ac-i686 ready trees
happy testing!
--
glen
___
pld-devel-en mailing list
pld-devel-en@lists.pld-linux.org
http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/pld-devel-en
On 05/03/07, Adam Gołębiowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Have a look at jajcus's recent thread on pld-discuss. It has been
> discussed there.
Uhm, then excuse me, I'm not subscribed to pld-discuss.
--
Michal Chruszcz
To follow the path: look to the master, follow the master,
walk with the
On Mon, Mar 05, 2007 at 08:22:06PM +0100, Michal Chruszcz wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> Today has begun the new edition of Google Summer of Code. From now on
> projects may supply applications to Google until March 12. Full
> timeline is here:
> http://code.google.com/support/bin/answer.py?answer=6032
Hi everyone,
Today has begun the new edition of Google Summer of Code. From now on
projects may supply applications to Google until March 12. Full
timeline is here:
http://code.google.com/support/bin/answer.py?answer=60325&topic=10729
Are we willing to miss the chance again this year? Or are we go
On Mon, Mar 05, 2007 at 06:15:32PM +0200, Elan Ruusamäe wrote:
> On Monday 05 March 2007 18:01:25 Kacper Kornet wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 05, 2007 at 04:56:58PM +0100, Kacper Kornet wrote:
> > > Best solution that I could find is in the attachment.
> > And the forgotten attachment.
> and please supp
On Monday 05 March 2007 18:01:25 Kacper Kornet wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 05, 2007 at 04:56:58PM +0100, Kacper Kornet wrote:
> > Best solution that I could find is in the attachment.
>
> And the forgotten attachment.
and please supply command to test?
--
glen
__
On Monday 05 March 2007 18:01:25 Kacper Kornet wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 05, 2007 at 04:56:58PM +0100, Kacper Kornet wrote:
> > Best solution that I could find is in the attachment.
>
> And the forgotten attachment.
i'm not sure are the define parameters necccessary at that context?
i guess we don't u
On Mon, Mar 05, 2007 at 04:56:58PM +0100, Kacper Kornet wrote:
> Best solution that I could find is in the attachment.
And the forgotten attachment.
--
Kacper Kornet
Index: builder
===
RCS file: /cvsroot/SPECS/builder,v
retrieving
The check_buildarch does not work correctly when the builder is called
with the --define argument. Best solution that I could find is in the
attachment.
Best wishes,
--
Kacper Kornet
___
pld-devel-en mailing list
pld-devel-en@lists.pld-linux.org
http:
On Sunday 25 February 2007, Andrzej Krzysztofowicz wrote:
> > $ rpmbuild --define "prep %dump" openvpn.spec 2>&1 | grep PACKAGE_VERSION
> > -1: PACKAGE_VERSION 2.0
> >
> > and that happens because there is subpackage with Version field in
> > openvpn.spec.
>
> However, the 1.380 builder handles
On Mon, Mar 05, 2007 at 01:06:54AM +0100, glen wrote:
> %files -n nessus-devel
> %defattr(644,root,root,755)
> +%dir %{_includedir}/nessus
It belongs to nessus-libs-devel (already required by nessus-devel).
--
Jakub Boguszhttp://qboosh.pl/
___
p
15 matches
Mail list logo