On Thu, 2007-08-02 at 15:00 +0200, Holger Levsen wrote:
[...]
> On Thursday 02 August 2007 14:41, Bernd Petrovitsch wrote:
> > > What do you think about a 0.5.3 bugfix release?
> >
> > Well, CVS-HEAD runs ATM unmodified at my node.
> >
> > Right before leaving for almost two weeks for vacation and being
> > completely offline?
> > After the series of brown paper bag releases?
> >
> > What do you think (apart from "Could it be worse than the last")?
> > We had only bug fixes and IMHO quite trivial cleanups, which should
> > generate compile errors at most.
> 
> I think I don't fully understand what you mean here.

The last two "releases" weren't too great (except the spf-refactoring -
which wasn't from me).
BTW without 

> As I understand the situation, CVS-HEAD has just some small fixes, compared to 
> 0.5.2. So I was asking whether you think it makes sense to release CVS-HEAD 
> as 0.5.3.

BTW: I can compile (and link) olsrd on Alpha without the "-fPIC" without
error. We have in make/Makefile.linux already
----  snip  ----
ifeq ($(ARCH),x86_64)
GENERATE_PIC = true
endif
ifeq ($(ARCH),alpha)
GENERATE_PIC = true
endif

ifdef GENERATE_PIC
CFLAGS +=       -fPIC
LDFLAGS +=      -fPIC
endif
----  snip  ----
which should take care of Alphas. If I know the output of "uname -m" on
HPPA, I can add that too.
But that doesn't answer the question, why the build of the package
breaks. Does "uname -m" no longer print "alpha" on Alphas?

Hmm, http://buildd.debian.org/~jeroen/status/package.php?p=olsrd shows
errors for IA64 and HPPA (and Alpha is "building").

Hmm, I have no IA64 or HPPA hardware somewhere. Is it enough to add
those two to the "-fPIC" hardware?

> If you dont want to do that, for whatever reasons, fine. It's your project, 

I don't think it's "mine" - I just happen to be the guy doing something.

> you know when to release :-)

	Bernd
-- 
Firmix Software GmbH                   http://www.firmix.at/
mobil: +43 664 4416156                 fax: +43 1 7890849-55
          Embedded Linux Development and Services




