On 2024-05-07 00:29, Simon Chopin wrote:
> As the one who reported the issue in the glibc upstream tracker, I'm now
> of the opinion it's not a glibc bug, but rather issues with the
> individual packages that are now FTBFS. As far as I know, this is either
> a parser pretending to be GCC without
As the one who reported the issue in the glibc upstream tracker, I'm now
of the opinion it's not a glibc bug, but rather issues with the
individual packages that are now FTBFS. As far as I know, this is either
a parser pretending to be GCC without implementing all the GCC features
(e.g.
2 matches
Mail list logo
