Re: aptitude on alpha (again, sigh)
On Thu, Nov 01, 2001 at 11:00:51PM +0100, Falk Hueffner <falk.hueffner@student.uni-tuebingen.de> was heard to say:
> Daniel Burrows <dburrows@debian.org> writes:
>
> > Can anyone reproduce/hunt down 114270? I can't reproduce it (I think
> > it's probably Alpha specific), and I don't really have much of an
> > idea where it could be. I haven't gotten any other reports of this,
> > which makes me wonder if maybe it could be the reporter's system.
>
> I can't reproduce this with version 0.2.7.1-1. Instead, it starts
> eating all memory when hitting return on a package, of course because
> of an unsigned int compared against string::npos (didn't we have this
> before a few times?)
>
> (The "comparison between signed and unsigned" warning of gcc is
> *EVIL*. It makes people fuck up their code. Don't listen to it. Use
> plain int.)
Yeah. I know that some earlier versions of aptitude worked on alpha,
but I don't know when it broke, and unfortunately my archive of old binary
packages only includes i386 packages.
I'm uploading source packages for 0.1.0 through the present now; I'll
see if I can hunt down even older stuff. (look in
http://people.debian.org/~dburrows/aptitude)
Daniel
--
/-------------------- Daniel Burrows <dburrows@debian.org> -------------------\
| Put no trust in cryptic comments. |
\------- (if (not (understand-this)) (go-to http://www.schemers.org)) --------/
Reply to: