In data lunedì 19 settembre 2016 11:32:18 CEST, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz ha scritto: > On 09/19/2016 09:08 AM, Pino Toscano wrote: > > Looking further at this very issue (#811846), I don't think the > > solution implemented is actually the correct one: > > > > https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/collab-maint/xbase64.git/commit/?id=39d6239543df5dff1707e14e129574ac393325af > > > > This just forces the C++ dialect to C++98, but that's only a workaround; > > looking at the build log in this bug (which can be produced also by > > rebuilding xbase64 in an up-to-date unstable/testing environment), > > there is a real bug in xbase64/xblock.cpp: > > > > std::cout << "xbLock constructor" << std::cout; > > > > std::cout is clearly wrong at the end, where std::endl is most probably > > what should be used; there are 5 occurrences of this in xbase64, all of > > them in xblock.cpp. > > Ugh, you're right. I somehow missed the debian/rules file completely, I > automatically interpreted the first changelog entry as "New upstream > release" and assumed those were upstream changes. > > Your fix is the correct one, of course. Interesting that the compiler > let's this slip with a warning instead of bailing out completely when > specifying -std=c++98. > > Anyway, I'll help Joerg incorporate the changes and the updated package > uploaded.
Friendly ping. Note that, if nothing happens within few days (say, friday 30th), then I'll NMU/2 the patch I sent earlier; it has been already 3 months since the switch to GCC 6, and this bug was reported months earlier. xbase64 is not a leaf package, so leaving it unfixed means blocking other packages (calligra, at least in my case). Thanks, -- Pino Toscano
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
