From d9702f72f088d32fea16ab699d5659dec8bd0685 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: "http://joeyh.name/" Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2014 17:46:23 +0000 Subject: Added a comment: turns out to be an upstream bug already filed --- .../comment_4_9fb9fdbc6218d6b86b0921f411f78891._comment | 12 ++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+) create mode 100644 doc/bugs/Bloom_filter_capacity_too_large_to_represent/comment_4_9fb9fdbc6218d6b86b0921f411f78891._comment diff --git a/doc/bugs/Bloom_filter_capacity_too_large_to_represent/comment_4_9fb9fdbc6218d6b86b0921f411f78891._comment b/doc/bugs/Bloom_filter_capacity_too_large_to_represent/comment_4_9fb9fdbc6218d6b86b0921f411f78891._comment new file mode 100644 index 000000000..77097e07c --- /dev/null +++ b/doc/bugs/Bloom_filter_capacity_too_large_to_represent/comment_4_9fb9fdbc6218d6b86b0921f411f78891._comment @@ -0,0 +1,12 @@ +[[!comment format=mdwn + username="http://joeyh.name/" + ip="209.250.56.132" + subject="turns out to be an upstream bug already filed" + date="2014-09-12T17:46:23Z" + content=""" +It seems that this is a bug on bloomfilter 2.0.0.0 on armel generally. It's also preventing this newer version from building on armel currently: + + + +The git-annex standalone arm autobuilder installed it with cabal, so ended up with the newer, broken version. +"""]] -- cgit v1.2.3