Bug#891005: RFS: gdbm/1.14.1-5
Hello
>With all my respect, I am very relucant to solve problems of Ubuntu at
>expense of Debian output. What exactly is wrong, Debian-wise, in package
>we are discussing, apart the need to specify long list of architectures,
>so I could fix it?
this is not an "Ubuntu" problem, but something that even Debian
had (remember, 4 bugs opened in less than a week).
So I would say, I'm reluctant in re-enabling something that did cause a lot
of troubles to Debian folks :)
Anyhow, if you want to enable, you can do something like this, to make me and you
happy, and then easily revert when new bugs are opened
HAVE_DIETLIBC=no
ifeq ($(shell dpkg -s dietlibc-dev | grep -o installed), installed)
DIET_LIBDIR := $(shell diet -L gcc)
HAVE_DIETLIBC=yes
endif
ifeq ($(shell dpkg-vendor --derives-from Ubuntu && echo yes),yes)
HAVE_DIETLIBC=no
endif
>Short answer: > because you need it to link program, using gdbm, with diet libc,
> resulting small static executable.
>Full answer:
> because I believe Debian should provide not only libraries for
> build-dependencies of something in /bin, but also libraries for
> developers to develop with.
>
> I did some search, and seems this is already happening. We have a lot
> of leaf libraries (mostly perl and java), for example:
> - libxmlenc-java
> - libwx-scintilla-perl
>
I can understand the reasons for having it, but the question is:
does it work?
How can I run some simple make commands to see if everything works?
because people on the bug reports tried and they said it wasn't working.
If you want to enable it, please make sure it works :)
>Or maybe we just need Guix/Nix?
I don't get this :)
cheers!
G.
Reply to: