On Wed, 1 Dec 2010, Michael Vogt wrote:
> Hey Thomas, thanks for explaining this about the xterm setgid bit.
no problem
--
Thomas E. Dickey
http://invisible-island.net
ftp://invisible-island.net
--
Please merge xterm 266-1 (main) from debian unstable (main)
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/677
Hey Thomas, thanks for explaining this about the xterm setgid bit.
--
Please merge xterm 266-1 (main) from debian unstable (main)
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/677129
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu-X,
which is subscribed to xterm in ubuntu.
__
This bug was fixed in the package xterm - 267-0ubuntu1
---
xterm (267-0ubuntu1) natty; urgency=low
* New upstream release (LP: #677129):
+ Minor formatting changes to ctlseqs.ms to simplify a script which
extracts the feature information
+ Add docs-clean makefile rule
Hello Michael,
> 1. xterm-266/debian/gbp.conf is modified but that is not documented in
the changelog
Seems this change was applied but never documented in the changelog
> 2. The debian/changelog file also mentions:
> "Remove setgid bit from the xterm binary (LP: #616100)"
> but I can not find i
xterm's makefile will automatically suppress the setgid-bit if (as in the
debdiff)
it is using utempter.
--
Please merge xterm 266-1 (main) from debian unstable (main)
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/677129
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu-X,
which is subscri
By the way, I release #267 last night, which has the above-mentioned
configure-script
changes.
--
Please merge xterm 266-1 (main) from debian unstable (main)
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/677129
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu-X,
which is subscribed to xte
Thanks for the xterm merge! I have two questions:
1. xterm-266/debian/gbp.conf is modified but that is not documented in
the changelog
2. The debian/changelog file also mentions:
"Remove setgid bit from the xterm binary (LP: #616100)"
but I can not find in the debdiff where that is done.
(the or
The debdiff has this comment in its patch for UXTerm.ad:
+ ! This includes "XTerm-color" which includes "XTerm", which defines fonts.
+ ! Why set them here?
The reason for setting fonts in UXTerm.ad is that they're different from the
ones in "XTerm", and override those values.
--
Please merge
I was sure I attached the debdiff. Attaching now, sorry.
** Patch added: "xterm_266-1ubuntu1.debdiff"
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/xterm/+bug/677129/+attachment/1738205/+files/xterm_266-1ubuntu1.debdiff
--
Please merge xterm 266-1 (main) from debian unstable (main)
https://bugs.
On Fri, 19 Nov 2010, Robert Hooker wrote:
> Thanks Thomas, that did fix a part of it, with xterm-266b:
I put an updated patch
xterm-266e.patch.gz
in
ftp://invisible-island.net/temp
which seems to work (given that I have to stub out pieces to reproduce the
configuration you're describing).
--
On Fri, 19 Nov 2010, Robert Hooker wrote:
> Thanks Thomas, that did fix a part of it, with xterm-266b:
thanks - I'll add a check for the x11 package, and email when that's
available (early morning - I'm near the end of my day, prone to error).
--
Thomas E. Dickey
http://invisible-island.net
ftp
Thanks Thomas, that did fix a part of it, with xterm-266b:
/bin/sh ../plink.sh gcc -g -Wall -O2 -DDEF_ALLOW_FONT=False
-DDEF_ALLOW_TCAP=False
-DDEF_DISALLOWED_WINDOW=\"1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,11,13,14,18,19,20,21,GetSelection,SetSelection,SetWinLines,SetXprop\"
-Wl,-Bsymbolic-functions -o xterm but
On Fri, 19 Nov 2010, Julien Cristau wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 00:11:02 -, Thomas Dickey wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 19 Nov 2010, Robert Hooker wrote:
>>
>>> It hasn't been synced because it doesn't build on natty, our delta can
>>> be dropped now otherwise. Do you have a patch to fix the linker
The natty toolchain switched to these standards coming soon to a wheezy
near you
http://wiki.debian.org/ToolChain/DSOLinking
/bin/sh ../plink.sh gcc -g -Wall -O2 -DDEF_ALLOW_FONT=False
-DDEF_ALLOW_TCAP=False
-DDEF_DISALLOWED_WINDOW=\"1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,11,13,14,18,19,20,21,GetSelection,SetSelec
On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 00:11:02 -, Thomas Dickey wrote:
> On Fri, 19 Nov 2010, Robert Hooker wrote:
>
> > It hasn't been synced because it doesn't build on natty, our delta can
> > be dropped now otherwise. Do you have a patch to fix the linker problem
> > by any chance?
>
> what was the li
On Fri, 19 Nov 2010, Robert Hooker wrote:
> It hasn't been synced because it doesn't build on natty, our delta can
> be dropped now otherwise. Do you have a patch to fix the linker problem
> by any chance?
what was the linker problem?
--
Thomas E. Dickey
http://invisible-island.net
ftp://invisi
It hasn't been synced because it doesn't build on natty, our delta can
be dropped now otherwise. Do you have a patch to fix the linker problem
by any chance?
--
Please merge xterm 266-1 (main) from debian unstable (main)
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/677129
You received this bug notification be
17 matches
Mail list logo
