Bug#393831: more info
* Wesley J. Landaker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-06-20 18:46]: > > package from ia64 for now... > I was hoping that the underlying bug in ld would get fixed and that this > would start working again, as it has in the past. Otherwise, yes, perhaps > it just needs to be removed from ia64. I'm not sure binutils is at fault here. I forwarded the bug upstream and there is a patch now floating around that fixes the ld assertation failure - but now ld produces an error. Maybe http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3351 will give you more clues as to what's wrong. -- Martin Michlmayr http://www.cyrius.com/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#393831: more info
On Wednesday 20 June 2007 00:22:34 Lucas Nussbaum wrote: > On 19/10/06 at 09:40 +0100, Martin Michlmayr wrote: > > * Wesley J. Landaker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-10-18 20:17]: > > > Hmmm... I'll see if upstream can help with this, but it can almost > > > guarantee it won't be in time for etch. (It's doubtful upstream has > > > an IA64 to test on). > > > > In this case I suggest you get the ia64 binary removed and downgrade > > this bug. > > Hi, > > Any news on this? I think that the best solution would be to remove the > package from ia64 for now... I was hoping that the underlying bug in ld would get fixed and that this would start working again, as it has in the past. Otherwise, yes, perhaps it just needs to be removed from ia64. -- Wesley J. Landaker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> OpenPGP FP: 4135 2A3B 4726 ACC5 9094 0097 F0A9 8A4C 4CD6 E3D2 signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Bug#393831: more info
On 19/10/06 at 09:40 +0100, Martin Michlmayr wrote: > * Wesley J. Landaker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-10-18 20:17]: > > Hmmm... I'll see if upstream can help with this, but it can almost > > guarantee > > it won't be in time for etch. (It's doubtful upstream has an IA64 to test > > on). > > In this case I suggest you get the ia64 binary removed and downgrade > this bug. Hi, Any news on this? I think that the best solution would be to remove the package from ia64 for now... -- | Lucas Nussbaum | [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.lucas-nussbaum.net/ | | jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] GPG: 1024D/023B3F4F | -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#393831: more info
* Wesley J. Landaker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-10-18 20:17]: > Hmmm... I'll see if upstream can help with this, but it can almost guarantee > it won't be in time for etch. (It's doubtful upstream has an IA64 to test > on). In this case I suggest you get the ia64 binary removed and downgrade this bug. -- Martin Michlmayr http://www.cyrius.com/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#393831: more info
On Wednesday 18 October 2006 03:39, Martin Michlmayr wrote: > ghdl_0.24+gcc4.1.1-1 can be compiled with a current version of sid. > > So it seems pretty clear this bug is due to a change from 0.24 to > 0.25. Hmmm... I'll see if upstream can help with this, but it can almost guarantee it won't be in time for etch. (It's doubtful upstream has an IA64 to test on). =( -- Wesley J. Landaker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> pgptVAGIhhIs3.pgp Description: PGP signature
Processed: Re: Bug#393831: more info
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > package ghdl Ignoring bugs not assigned to: ghdl > forwarded 393831 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Bug#393831: FTBFS on ia64: fails with ld assertion failure Noted your statement that Bug has been forwarded to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > tag 393831 upstream help Bug#393831: FTBFS on ia64: fails with ld assertion failure There were no tags set. Tags added: upstream, help > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#393831: more info
ghdl_0.24+gcc4.1.1-1 can be compiled with a current version of sid. So it seems pretty clear this bug is due to a change from 0.24 to 0.25. -- Martin Michlmayr http://www.cyrius.com/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
