Your message dated Sun, 24 Jun 2007 15:11:28 +0200
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#430279: ldbl128 transition for alpha, powerpc, sparc, s390
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am
talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration
somewhere. Please contact me immediately.)
Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)
--- Begin Message ---
Package: libniftiio0-dev
Severity: serious
User: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Usertags: goal-ldbl128
Discussed in http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2007/05/msg01173.html
With glibc-2.5 and gcc-4.1.2 (and gcc-4.2), the 'long double'
data type did change from a 64bit representation to a 128bit
representation on alpha, powerpc, sparc, s390. To allow
partial upgrades of packages, we will need to rename all
packages holding libraries with the long double data type in
their API. Both libc and libstdc++ do not need to be renamed,
because they support both representations. We rename the library
packages on all architectures to avoid name mismatches between
architectures (you can avoid the renaming by supporting both
datatype representations in the library as done in glibc and
libstdc++, but unless a library is prepared for that, it does not
seem to be worth the effort).
It is suggested to rename a package libfoo1 to libfoo1ldbl;
please wait with the renaming if the package depends on
another library package which needs renaming.
This package has been indentified as one with header files in
/usr/include matching 'long *double'. Please close this bug report
if it is a false positive, or rename the package accordingly.
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi,
On Sat, Jun 23, 2007 at 03:48:20PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
> Package: libniftiio0-dev
> Severity: serious
> User: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Usertags: goal-ldbl128
>
> Discussed in http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2007/05/msg01173.html
>
> With glibc-2.5 and gcc-4.1.2 (and gcc-4.2), the 'long double'
> data type did change from a 64bit representation to a 128bit
> representation on alpha, powerpc, sparc, s390. To allow
> partial upgrades of packages, we will need to rename all
> packages holding libraries with the long double data type in
> their API. Both libc and libstdc++ do not need to be renamed,
> because they support both representations. We rename the library
> packages on all architectures to avoid name mismatches between
> architectures (you can avoid the renaming by supporting both
> datatype representations in the library as done in glibc and
> libstdc++, but unless a library is prepared for that, it does not
> seem to be worth the effort).
>
> It is suggested to rename a package libfoo1 to libfoo1ldbl;
> please wait with the renaming if the package depends on
> another library package which needs renaming.
>
> This package has been indentified as one with header files in
> /usr/include matching 'long *double'. Please close this bug report
> if it is a false positive, or rename the package accordingly.
I believe this is a false positive. I did a:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/include/nifti$ grep -A 4 -B 4 -R 'long *double' *
nifti1.h-#define DT_UINT16 512 /* unsigned short (16 bits)
*/
nifti1.h-#define DT_UINT32 768 /* unsigned int (32 bits)
*/
nifti1.h-#define DT_INT64 1024 /* long long (64 bits)
*/
nifti1.h-#define DT_UINT64 1280 /* unsigned long long (64
bits) */
nifti1.h:#define DT_FLOAT128 1536 /* long double (128 bits)
*/
nifti1.h-#define DT_COMPLEX128 1792 /* double pair (128 bits)
*/
nifti1.h:#define DT_COMPLEX256 2048 /* long double pair (256
bits) */
nifti1.h-/* @} */
nifti1.h-
nifti1.h-
nifti1.h- /*------- aliases for all the above codes
---*/
--
nifti1.h- /*! signed long long. */
nifti1.h-#define NIFTI_TYPE_INT64 1024
nifti1.h- /*! unsigned long long. */
nifti1.h-#define NIFTI_TYPE_UINT64 1280
nifti1.h: /*! 128 bit float = long
double. */
nifti1.h-#define NIFTI_TYPE_FLOAT128 1536
nifti1.h- /*! 128 bit complex = 2 64 bit
floats. */
nifti1.h-#define NIFTI_TYPE_COMPLEX128 1792
nifti1.h- /*! 256 bit complex = 2 128 bit
floats */
--
nifti1.h- /*-------- sample typedefs for complicated types
---*/
nifti1.h-#if 0
nifti1.h-typedef struct { float r,i; } complex_float ;
nifti1.h-typedef struct { double r,i; } complex_double ;
nifti1.h:typedef struct { long double r,i; } complex_longdouble ;
nifti1.h-typedef struct { unsigned char r,g,b; } rgb_byte ;
nifti1.h-#endif
nifti1.h-
nifti1.h-/*---------------------------------------------------------------------------*/
So the matching datatype definition is just an example. The other
datatypes already assume a 128bit representation, but are simply labels
that have to be supplied be the user to identify the datatype of binary
chunks stored inside to-be-read files.
I think it is save to close this bug.
Please reopen this bug, if you think the problem persists.
Thanks,
Michael
--
GPG key: 1024D/3144BE0F Michael Hanke
http://apsy.gse.uni-magdeburg.de/hanke
ICQ: 48230050
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
--- End Message ---
