[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

[edd@debian.org: Re: Bug#266837: rpvm_0.6.2-1_hppa: FTBFS: relocation R_PARISC_DPREL21L can not be used when making a shared object; recompile with -fPIC]

Forwarding this to the ctte as Dirk is not subscribed.

/* Steinar */
Homepage: http://www.sesse.net/
--- Begin Message ---
On Fri, Aug 20, 2004 at 03:07:47PM +0200, Steinar H. Gunderson wrote:
> Reply-To: 
> In-Reply-To: <[🔎] 20040820082111.F24350@links.magenta.com>
> X-Operating-System: Linux 2.6.6 on a i686
> On Fri, Aug 20, 2004 at 08:21:11AM -0400, Raul Miller wrote:
> >> The entire discussion here is whether #266762 is wishlist or not. I claim it
> >> is; the rpvm people claim it is serious.
> > It's a serious bug for rpvm, it's a wishlist bug for pvm.
> I thought it would be important for rpvm, but that's another discussion which
> isn't my call anyhow.
> Anyhow, I have absolutely no problem unmerging 266837, reassigning it back to
> rpvm and let the rpvm maintainers do as they please with its severity, but
> Dirk seems to disagree. Dirk, could you comment? (Cc-ing you in case you're
> not following 266762/266837 or debian-ctte.)

I can't post to -ctte as I am not subscribed, and I don't have time to
subscribe, deal with procmail etc pp

I fear I've said everything a few times over already, without any measurable
result. With > 70 packages plus a few other projects I can't spend forever
on this. Sorry.  To me, having packages fails because the underlying and
required libs are build wrongly is a clear RC issue that should get fixed
now to get ia64, hppa, ... packages in the distro. 


Those are my principles, and if you don't like them... well, I have others.
                                                -- Groucho Marx

--- End Message ---

Reply to: