|author||Thomas Schwinge <email@example.com>||2014-03-09 20:10:58 +0100|
|committer||Thomas Schwinge <firstname.lastname@example.org>||2014-03-09 20:10:58 +0100|
Diffstat (limited to 'open_issues/ti-rpc_then_nfs.mdwn')
1 files changed, 27 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/open_issues/ti-rpc_then_nfs.mdwn b/open_issues/ti-rpc_then_nfs.mdwn
index c3dd4e26..46cc1c1c 100644
@@ -103,3 +103,30 @@ re-enabled, [[!message-id "email@example.com"]].
<pere> failing rpcinfo -p on hurd reported as <URL:
http://bugs.debian.org/739674 >. Anyone got a clue how to debug it?
+## IRC, OFTC, #debian-hurd, 2014-03-03
+ <pere> I was just tipped by sesse that the hurd fix for libtirpc probably
+ caused RC bug in nfs-common, <URL: https://bugs.debian.org/740491 >.
+ Have not had time to check it out more closely.
+## IRC, OFTC, #debian-hurd, 2014-03-04
+ <youpi> pere: I don't really see how debian/patches/05-hurd-port.diff could
+ break Linux' libtirpc
+ <youpi> AIUI, the patch has zero effect on non-hurd builds
+ <youpi> oh wait
+ <youpi> it's simply missing a reautoconf to get HAVE_SYS_USER_H undefined
+ in config.h.in
+ <pere> youpi: I am quite sure I did add the required dh_autoreconf call.
+ did you see a build log where it was missing?
+ <youpi> pere: ah, ok. Then 02-rerun-bootstrap.diff can be dropped
+ <youpi> and I don't have any further idea
+ <youpi> pere: maybe it's the autoreconf itself which broke something?
+ <pere> could be. not quite sure how to find out.
+ <gnu_srs> pere: what about running autoreconf on the previous (working
+ <pere> gnu_srs: sound like a good idea. perhaps a good idea to just
+ disable the two patches as a start.