Re: Sparc port
On (07/02/03 11:56), Joel Baker wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 07, 2003 at 04:12:37PM +0000, Matthew Rose wrote:
> > On (22/10/02 15:44), Joel Baker wrote:
> > > On Tue, Oct 22, 2002 at 04:39:21PM +0100, John Ineson wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Oct 21, 2002 at 06:07:42PM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> > > > [...]
> > > > > Oh, and mentions of patch locations aren't ideal now. Joel's got rather a
> > > > > lot of cleaner ones in his CVS tree,
> > > >
> > > > Where do I find that? I can't see any reference to it in the list
> > > > archives.
> > > >
> > > > At present, dpkg won't build because it can't find obstack.h, which
> > > > seems to be part of glibc. Is there a patch for dpkg that I need?
> > >
> > > Er. I should probably put it up, shouldn't I? Fixed, and linked from
> > > http://debian-bsd.lightbearer.com/
> >
> > I'm having trouble reading
> > http://debian-bsd.lightbearer.com/Debian-NetBSD/patches/dpkg
> > Is the patch elsewhere?
>
> This has been fixed. Permission stupidity on my part, sorry.
>
> > Does bsd libc include an obstack equivalent?
>
> Hrm. Not sure. I can look, but I see no 'man obstack'; is there a
> reference for what I should be looking for?
> --
> Joel Baker <fenton@debian.org>
That was my foolishness. obstack is included in dpkg in splendid gnu
style. I think dpkg just needs prodding to use it's own obstack rather
than glibc.
In other words I think the obstack thing is just the symptom of dpkg
not recognising the environment.
Matt
Reply to: