On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 2:50 PM, Jakub Wilk <jw...@debian.org> wrote: > * Mathieu Malaterre <ma...@debian.org>, 2014-03-27, 13:06: > >> I preferred not to mass bug everyone out there and instead: >> >> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=742780 > > > But many packages don't regenerate autofoo at build-time. :-(
And your point is ? It may not impact package built with gcc-4.5, only those that have been rebuild since gcc-4.6. But anyway the generated code (whether it is in m4 or in the generated auto* stuff) is bogus since the begining. >> LFS is still a release goal, not a requirement. > > > Then "severity: grave" is probably overkill. :-P If as an application programmer I cannot get memcpy to copy past the first 32bits of size_t (x86_64), I would call it a grave issue in libc. Same thing if I use autoconf macro to tell whether or not my system support LFS, but it keeps on claiming it does not. I personally call it a grave issue ... right ? This is really a regression, package on 32bits arch used to support LFS, but since gcc 4.6 came it they do not anymore. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/CA+7wUszd=ux-gm=wje6stgeheztp6zmdb0sz47aas0ncc4l...@mail.gmail.com
