On Wed, Jul 11, 2007 at 10:38:21AM -0700, Zack Weinberg wrote: > If you look carefully at the buildd log for this one, you see it went > off the rails a long time before that...
> checking whether we are using the GNU C++ compiler... no > checking whether g++ accepts -g... no > checking dependency style of g++... none > checking for C++ compiler warning flags... unknown > ^^ this looks like a completely nonfunctional C++ compiler. Actually, > there are problems even earlier: > The following extra packages will be installed: > cpp-2.95 g++-2.95 gcc-2.95 libboost-filesystem1.34.0 libboost-regex1.34.0 > libc6.1-dev libicu36 libicu36-dev libstdc++2.10-dev libstdc++2.10-glibc2.2 > linux-libc-dev zlib1g-dev > ^^ g++ *2.95*?! What on earth is it doing using that dinosaur? > Upstream doesn't support anything before 3.3, and would like to bump > that to 3.4. > I need advice from the alpha porters on what might be wrong here and > how to proceed. debian-alpha cc:ed. The most recent upload of glibc to unstable has introduced a libc-dev dependency which is in conflict with the sbuild configuration on multiple buildds. As a result, libstdc++-dev has gone missing from these chroots, and the buildd admin will need to make some changes to restore build-essential in these environments. Closing the bug report since this is not a bug in monotone. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
