On 05-Jan-13 21:40, Kurt Roeckx wrote: > On Thu, Jan 13, 2005 at 09:24:53PM +0100, Andreas Jochens wrote: > > > > please specify which patches that are used by the gcc-3.4 archive are > > broken. > > The last case I saw was your patch for newlib (#289688). There > are others, but I can't remember them all.
This is correct, my patch was wrong. It caused the binary package to be empty instead of not building at all and I did not notice that. But the newlib package is broken on amd64 anyway and a real fix for this is not yet known AFAIK. This is not really an example which could show that the gcc-3.4 archive is broken. Nevertheless, the gcc-3.4 archive uses more than 500 patches at the moment and of course some of those _will_ be broken. Most of the patches change only a few lines of code to fix problems with the stricter standard conformity checks of gcc-3.4 and/or gcc-4.0 - but still, there will be errors. I filed 1230 bug reports with patches during the last 7 months, mainly to fix compilation problems with gcc-3.4 and gcc-4.0. Roughly 700 of those patches have already applied by the maintainers and/or upstream. But of course some of my patches were wrong and were rejected or corrected by the maintainers, by upstream or even by yourself (thanks!). Regards Andreas Jochens BTW: You changed the bug submitter when commenting on my bug report #289688. This is not really nice because it makes it difficult for me to follow the discussion. Please don't do that. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
