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

Bug#533526: marked as done (qt4-x11: FTBFS on hurd-i386)

Your message dated Fri, 10 Jul 2009 10:51:51 +0200
with message-id <20090710085151.GA10845@const.bordeaux.inria.fr>
and subject line Re: Bug#533526: qt4-x11: FTBFS on hurd-i386
has caused the Debian Bug report #533526,
regarding qt4-x11: FTBFS on hurd-i386
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact owner@bugs.debian.org

533526: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=533526
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: qt4-x11
Version: 4.5.1-2
Severity: important
Tags: patch


qt4-x11 currently FTBFS on hurd-i386 because since clock_gettime is not
available there qt4-x11 reverts to using gettimeofday, but it doesn't
include <sys/time.h> where the latter is defined, see attached patch.


-- System Information:
Debian Release: squeeze/sid
  APT prefers testing
  APT policy: (990, 'testing'), (500, 'unstable'), (500, 'stable'), (1, 'experimental')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)

Kernel: Linux 2.6.30 (SMP w/2 CPU cores)
Locale: LANG=fr_FR.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=fr_FR.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash
--- src/corelib/concurrent/qtconcurrentiteratekernel.cpp.orig	2009-06-16 22:11:11.000000000 +0000
+++ src/corelib/concurrent/qtconcurrentiteratekernel.cpp	2009-06-16 22:11:19.000000000 +0000
@@ -49,6 +49,7 @@
 #elif defined(Q_OS_UNIX)
+#include <sys/time.h>
 #include <time.h>
 #include <unistd.h>

--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Version: 4:4.5.2-1

Samuel Thibault, le Fri 10 Jul 2009 10:30:32 +0200, a écrit :
> Could you please apply the patch?

Ah, sorry, I should have checked further.


--- End Message ---

Reply to: