Hi Adam, "Adam D. Barratt" <[email protected]> writes: > Hmm, presumably it worked at some point, given there are armhf binaries > in unstable. :-( Ack. My guess is that it worked with gcc 4.6.
> Given that 3.1 appears never to have managed to build on several > architectures in unstable (a regression in each case) and that I assume > the intention would be to introduce 3.2 to unstable after the release, > then if Sylvestre's not opposed reintroducing a fixed 3.0 to sid > temporarily may be the sanest answer. I just uploaded 1:3.0-6.1 to unstable. I presume you want me to close this bug and open an unblock request instead, right? :) -- Best regards, Michael -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
