Bug#387616: FTBFS with GCC 4.2: uses removed minimum/maximum operator

2007-10-01 Thread Lucas Nussbaum
Hi, There's a new upstream version available that probably fixes this bug, according to the statement in the bug log. Lucas On 15/09/06 at 19:07 +0200, Yann Dirson wrote: Hi, I can see that 2.0.5 (in incoming) is affected as well. Damn, why didn't they push for normalization of those ops

Bug#387616: FTBFS with GCC 4.2: uses removed minimum/maximum operator

2007-06-29 Thread Martin Michlmayr
* Yann Dirson [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2006-09-15 19:07]: I can see that 2.0.5 (in incoming) is affected as well. Damn, why didn't they push for normalization of those ops instead of dropping them :( Do you know whether upstream has fixed this in the meantime? As per

Bug#387616: FTBFS with GCC 4.2: uses removed minimum/maximum operator

2006-09-15 Thread Martin Michlmayr
Package: tulip Version: 2.0.4-3.1 Your package fails to build with GCC 4.2. Version 4.2 has not been released yet but I'm building with a snapshot in order to find errors and give people an advance warning. You're using an minimum/maximum or similar operator (that is, ?, ?, ?=, or ?=) which has

Bug#387616: FTBFS with GCC 4.2: uses removed minimum/maximum operator

2006-09-15 Thread Yann Dirson
Hi, I can see that 2.0.5 (in incoming) is affected as well. Damn, why didn't they push for normalization of those ops instead of dropping them :( On Fri, Sep 15, 2006 at 01:55:17PM +0200, Martin Michlmayr wrote: Package: tulip Version: 2.0.4-3.1 Your package fails to build with GCC 4.2.