Re: libc6-based xpm4
On Fri, 12 Sep 1997 mdorman@debian.org wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 12, 1997 at 07:06:25PM +0100, Enrique Zanardi wrote:
> > I have almost finished a non-mantainer version of the xpm libs, for libc6
> > systems. (Will be finished tonight, it's just a matter of "dpkg-buildpackage
> > -rsudo").
> >
>> I have sent two messages this week to the xpm mantainer, Michael Alan Dorman
>> <mdorman@debian.org>, but haven't received any answer yet.
> >
> > Should I upload those packages, or wait a little more?
>
> As long as you've done them from the xpm4, rather than xpm4.7 sources,
> I have absolutely no problem with you uploading them. I'm going to be
> changing jobs in the very near future, and will not have access to an
> Intel Debian system any time soon.
I've used the latest sources (xpm4_3.4j-0). From those sources five
packages are built, xpm4, xpm4-altdev (both for libc5), xpm4g, xpm4g-dev
and xpm-bin (these three for libc6).
I will upload them tonight (or tomorrow morning) and send you the diffs.
It has been very easy to adapt the debian/ files to build the new packages,
using your nice deb-files utility.
> I _plan_ to move all my Debian development to the Alpha platform in
> the near future. It actually mostly already is, but I'm *way* behind.
Talking about the Alpha, is all that libc6-based vs libc5-based stuff having
any undesirable effect in that port? AFAIK, Alphas have been using libc6
for a while. Is the library renaming necessary, as it is in the ix86 port?,
--
Enrique Zanardi ezanardi@ull.es
Dpto. Fisica Fundamental y Experimental Univ. de La Laguna
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org .
Trouble? e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .
Reply to: