Your message dated Mon, 28 May 2001 00:08:35 +0200 (MEST)
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line fixed bugs in gcc-3.0 (3.0.ds6-0pre010526)
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.)
Darren Benham
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)
--------------------------------------
Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 10 Apr 2001 23:40:15 +0000
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue Apr 10 18:40:15 2001
Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from mail.cis.ohio-state.edu (cis.ohio-state.edu) [164.107.115.5]
(root)
by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 1 (Debian))
id 14n7k7-0003Hk-00; Tue, 10 Apr 2001 18:40:15 -0500
Received: from verbum.org ([EMAIL PROTECTED] [164.107.112.16])
by cis.ohio-state.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id TAA21510
for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Tue, 10 Apr 2001 19:40:14 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from space-ghost.verbum.org (space-ghost.verbum.org [192.168.5.90])
by verbum.org (Postfix (Debian/GNU)) with ESMTP id B246674FE
for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Tue, 10 Apr 2001 19:40:09 -0400 (EDT)
Received: by space-ghost.verbum.org (Postfix (Debian/GNU), from userid 1000)
id 5A246E083E; Tue, 10 Apr 2001 19:39:03 -0400 (EDT)
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: libgcj300-dev should Depend: on libgcj300
X-Attribution: Colin
X-Face:
%'w-_>8Mj2_'=;I$myE#]G"'D>x3CY_rk,K06:mXFUvWy>;3I"BW3_-MAiUby{O(mn"[EMAIL
PROTECTED]
dd`)Vk[27^^Sa<qRKA=qTu-uV/qLcGrMm-}A24N2wgr)5%_46(#WMTajfXc_DBt)&'/(J1
User-Agent: Microsoft Gnus Express, Build 5.090001 (0.01)
Organization: The Ohio State University Dept. of Computer and Info. Science
Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Original-Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: Colin Walters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 10 Apr 2001 19:39:03 -0400
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Lines: 19
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Package: libgcj300-dev
Version: 1:3.0-0pre010403
Severity: normal
I don't think libgcj300-dev is very useful without libgcj300. Is
there a policy that -dev packages should depend on their non-dev
counterparts?
-- System Information
Debian Release: testing/unstable
Architecture: powerpc
Kernel: Linux space-ghost 2.4.3 #1 Mon Apr 2 20:54:12 EDT 2001 ppc
Versions of packages libgcj300-dev depends on:
ii gcj-3.0 1:3.0-0pre010403 The GNU compiler for Java(TM).
ii libc6 2.2.2-1 GNU C Library: Shared libraries an
ii libc6-dev 2.2.2-1 GNU C Library: Development Librari
ii zlib1g 1:1.1.3-14 compression library - runtime
ii zlib1g-dev 1:1.1.3-14 compression library - development
---------------------------------------
Received: (at 93597-done) by bugs.debian.org; 27 May 2001 22:10:16 +0000
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sun May 27 17:10:16 2001
Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from mail.cs.tu-berlin.de [130.149.17.13] (root)
by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 1 (Debian))
id 1548jm-0005Ir-00; Sun, 27 May 2001 17:10:14 -0500
Received: from bolero.cs.tu-berlin.de ([EMAIL PROTECTED] [130.149.19.1])
by mail.cs.tu-berlin.de (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id AAA03363;
Mon, 28 May 2001 00:08:35 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: (from [EMAIL PROTECTED])
by bolero.cs.tu-berlin.de (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3) id AAA01795;
Mon, 28 May 2001 00:08:35 +0200 (MEST)
From: Matthias Klose <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 00:08:35 +0200 (MEST)
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED],
[EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED],
[EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED],
[EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED],
[EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED],
[EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED],
[EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED],
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: fixed bugs in gcc-3.0 (3.0.ds6-0pre010526)
X-Mailer: VM 6.43 under 20.4 "Emerald" XEmacs Lucid
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
gcc-3.0 (3.0.ds6-0pre010526) unstable; urgency=high
* Urgency "high" for replacing the gcc-3.0 snapshots in testing, which
now are incompatile due to the changed ABIs.
* Upstream begins tagging with "gcc-3_0_pre_2001mmdd".
* Tighten dependencies to install only binary packages derived from
one source (#98851). Tighten libc6-dev dependency to match libc6.
gcc-3.0 (3.0.ds6-0pre010525) unstable; urgency=low
* ATTENTION: The ABI (exception handling) changed. No upgrade path from
earlier snapshots (you had been warned in the postinst ...)
Closing #93597, #94576, #96448, #96461.
You have to rebuild
* HELP is appreciated for scanning the Debian BTS and sending followups
to bug reports!!!
* Should we name debian gcc uploads? What about a "still seeking
g++ maintainer" upload?
* Fixed in gcc-3.0: #97030
* Update patches for recent (010525) CVS sources.
* Make check depend on build target (fakeroot problmes).
* debian/rules.d/binary-libgcc.mk: new file, build first.
* Free memory detection on the hurd for running the testsuite.
* Update debhelper build dependency.
* libstdc++-doc: Include doxygen generated docs.
* Fix boring packaging bugs, too tired for appropriate changelogs ...
#93343, #96348, #96262, #97134, #97905, #96451, #95812, #93157
* Fixed bugs: #87000.
