reassign 935902 g++-9
affects 935902 libcppunit-dev
found 935902 9.2.1-12
close 935902 9.2.1-16
thanks
Hi,
On Thu, Oct 31, 2019 at 03:15:10PM +0100, Matthias Klose wrote:
> The comment about cppunit made me look at the cppunit package to find
> #935902, and yes, the test case is reproducible. So
Hi,
Am 31. Oktober 2019 15:15:10 MEZ schrieb Matthias Klose :
>And afaik there was no test rebuild for
>bullseye
>either.
Accepted cppunit 1.14.0-4 (source) into unstable
On July 26:
https://tracker.debian.org/news/1049803/accepted-cppunit-1140-4-source-into-unstable/
Buster release was 3
Hi,
Am 31. Oktober 2019 15:15:10 MEZ schrieb Matthias Klose :
>On 29.10.19 15:09, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
>> On 2019-10-29 13:09:46 +0100, rene.engelh...@mailbox.org wrote:
>>> Am 29. Oktober 2019 12:49:44 MEZ schrieb Vincent Lefevre
>:
In case makefile magic triggers some rebuild, you can
reassign 943401 gcc-9
found 943401 9.2.1-12
retitle 943401 libreoffice C++ Unit tests failing when built with gcc >=
9.2.1-12 (Failure instantiating exceptionprotector)
thanks
On Tue, Oct 29, 2019 at 03:09:50PM +0100, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> 1. Build smoketest with the old g++-9 / libstdc++6.
Hi,
Am 29. Oktober 2019 15:09:50 MEZ schrieb Vincent Lefevre :
>On 2019-10-29 13:09:46 +0100, rene.engelh...@mailbox.org wrote:
>> Am 29. Oktober 2019 12:49:44 MEZ schrieb Vincent Lefevre
>:
>> >In case makefile magic triggers some rebuild, you can also run the
>> >generated executable directly
Hi,
Am 29. Oktober 2019 12:49:44 MEZ schrieb Vincent Lefevre :
>In case makefile magic triggers some rebuild, you can also run the
>generated executable directly (with the right environment variables,
>in case this matters). If the programs honors the system ABI, this
>is allowed, and you'll
Hi again,
Am 29. Oktober 2019 11:26:41 MEZ schrieb rene.engelh...@mailbox.org:
>Hi,
>
>Am 29. Oktober 2019 10:59:07 MEZ schrieb Vincent Lefevre
>:
>> If you build LO
>>with an older gcc-9 version, upgrade libstdc++6, and run the test
>>again (without rebuilding it), does it fail?
>
>This is
Hi,
Am 29. Oktober 2019 10:59:07 MEZ schrieb Vincent Lefevre :
> If you build LO
>with an older gcc-9 version, upgrade libstdc++6, and run the test
>again (without rebuilding it), does it fail?
This is impossible. This is a C++ unit test and the stuff assumes too much of
the build tree. You
Hi,
On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 10:39:37PM +0100, Matthias Klose wrote:
> > but let's try to work together to fix the current situation.
That's what I tried, but... Disabling make check (as will be done)
is not "fix"ing but just hiding it.
> my moreinfo tag was removed, and I'm not interested in a
Hi,
On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 10:39:37PM +0100, Matthias Klose wrote:
> On 28.10.19 22:17, Paul Gevers wrote:
> > Dear all,
> >
> > The visible progress on this bug report stopped several days ago. I'd
> > like to try an get it a bit further. I'm expecting frustration on all
> > sides,
>
> yes,
Hi,
On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 10:17:49PM +0100, Paul Gevers wrote:
> Rene, I really appreciate the fact that libreoffice has an extensive
> test suite. But just to get options on the table can you please tell us
> how severe this particular failure is? In other words, how much is this
> telling you
Hi,
On Fri, Oct 25, 2019 at 06:48:45PM +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> > or adding information what is going wrong?
>
> See above. apt-get build-dep libreoffice, install the test
> depenencies of smoketest, debian/tests/smoketest in the chroot.
Or just build libreoffice as is in
On Fri, Oct 25, 2019 at 06:45:27PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
> Control: tags -1 + moreinfo
>
> On 25.10.19 18:33, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> > And since then I also can just reproduce it in a chroot, too.
>
> You didn't say that before.
I did in https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-
Hi,
On Fri, Oct 25, 2019 at 06:33:13PM +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 25, 2019 at 06:25:43PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
> > [...] -12 was uploaded on Oct 23, but you say
> > that the tests started failing on Oct 21.
>
> No, the submitter did which clearly w
Hi,
On Fri, Oct 25, 2019 at 06:25:43PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
> [...] -12 was uploaded on Oct 23, but you say
> that the tests started failing on Oct 21.
No, the submitter did which clearly was wrong. Please read the bug,
I said that at my very first message.
> So why do you think this is
Hi,
On Fri, Oct 25, 2019 at 05:59:53PM +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> > > OK, thanks, reassigning to src:gcc-9 (libstdc++6 for now) then.
> >
> > no. based on what rationale?
And to prevent said gcc-9 version from migrating, to not break something
else (no
reassign 943401 libstdc++6
thanks
On Fri, Oct 25, 2019 at 05:53:54PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
> Control: reassign -1 src:libreoffice
>
> On 25.10.19 17:31, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> > reassign 943401 libstdc++6
> > found 943401 9.2.1-12
> > thanks
> >
>
reassign 943401 libstdc++6
found 943401 9.2.1-12
thanks
Hi,
On Fri, Oct 25, 2019 at 12:21:11PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
> > I guess I need to disable make check to get round this.. (Unless someone
> > at GCC tells me what change libstdc++6(?) might have to cause this or
> > some other
1 + help
thanks
Hi,
On Thu, Oct 24, 2019 at 07:21:47PM +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 24, 2019 at 06:19:55PM +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> > So they might be just flaky? That is not new (in buildd builds they also
> > just som
>
> So, the last exception one (which I
[ Cc'ing the GCC maintainers ]
Hi,
On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 03:47:50PM +0200, Sorin Manolache wrote:
> When compiling a program with g++-9 (4:9.2.1-3) and linking with libcppunit
> then I get a segfault if the program uses std::stack.
Hrmpf.
> For example:
>
> void f() {
> std::stack s1;
>
On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 08:58:01PM +0100, Ondřej Surý wrote:
> Control: severity -1 important
> Control: reassign -1 gcc-7
> Control: forcemerge 882415 -1
>
> This has been reported as bug in gcc-7 and I am taking doko's suggestion
> and downgrading the -O3 to -O2 meanwhile in 1:10.1.29-3 as a
reassign 823145 src:libreoffice
retitle 823145 FTBFS with gcc 6: -isystem /usr/include in KDE4_CFLAGS breaks
includes
thanks
Hi,
On Sun, May 08, 2016 at 01:23:32PM +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> Jup. See "checking for KDE4 headers... /usr/include". Which ends up as
>
>
On Sun, May 08, 2016 at 01:05:47PM +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> > By the way, is there any particular reason why LibreOffice buildsystem uses
> > -isystem /usr/include?
>
> Probably some bug where it just adds whatever -I it finds (and be it
> /usr/include, which sho
Hi,
On Tue, May 03, 2016 at 09:32:55PM +0300, Dmitry Shachnev wrote:
> > In file included from /usr/include/c++/6/bits/stl_algo.h:59:0,
> > from /usr/include/c++/6/algorithm:62,
> > from /usr/include/qt4/QtCore/qglobal.h:68,
> > from
tag 811686 + pending
thanks
Hi,
On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 04:58:11PM -0800, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
> Note that only the first error is reported; there might be more. You
There definitely are. (And some subtle ones, reading from upstreams commits
for 5.2.x)
> >
reassign 804358 python-guiqwt
found 804358 2.3.1-1
thanks
[ I am not the gcc/libstdc++6 maintainer ]
Hi,
On Sat, Nov 07, 2015 at 06:24:05PM +, Debian Bug Tracking System wrote:
> Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
>
> > reassign 804358 libstdc++6
> Bug #804358 [python-guiqwt]
Package: libstdc++6
Version: 5.2.1-13
Severity: important
Hi,
$ dpkg --info libstdc++6_5.2.1-13_ppc64el.deb | grep Breaks
Breaks: [...], libreoffice-core (= 1:4.4.4-1), [...]
As said on IRC I has an at job scheduled for yesterday 13:00 to upload 4.4.5-1.
Which ran but since dak was broken for
Hi,
I think that libgcj10 is simply an error. There is no = 4.7.0 of that,
neither of libgcj12.
$ rmadison libgcj10 libgcj11 libgcj12 libgcj13
libgcj10 | 4.4.5-2 | squeeze | amd64, armel, i386, ia64, kfreebsd-amd64,
kfreebsd-i386, mips, mipsel, powerpc, s390, sparc
libgcj10 | 4.4.7-1 |
Hi,
On Sat, Feb 25, 2012 at 02:16:09PM +, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:
# file /usr/share/libreoffice/sdk/classes/win/unowinreg.dll
/usr/share/libreoffice/sdk/classes/win/unowinreg.dll: PE32 executable (DLL)
(console) Intel 80386 (stripped to external PDB), for MS Windows
Hi,
On Sat, Feb 25, 2012 at 01:49:02PM +, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:
it's even more hilarious than that: it's actually because java can't
access windows registry functions, so someone wrote a c-based DLL
which java *can* bind to. the fact that the end-result of the
Yes, that is
Hi,
Libreoffice hasn't yet been built on armhf. I consider libreoffice to be
a reasonablly important package and one that we need to get in before we
can claim we have a reasonablly complete port.
And the segfault described on
@@
+gcc-4.6 (4.6.1-11.1) unstable; urgency=low
+
+ [ Rene Engelhard ]
+ * Non-maintainer upload.
+ * Add patch for PR c++/50442, reverting fix for PR c++/49267
+
+ -- Rene Engelhard r...@debian.org Mon, 19 Sep 2011 17:57:52 +0200
+
gcc-4.6 (4.6.1-11) unstable; urgency=low
* Update to SVN
Package: libgcj-bc
Version: 4.4.5-7
Severity: serious
(sid)root@frodo:/# apt-get dist-upgrade
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree
Reading state information... Done
Calculating upgrade... Done
The following packages have been kept back:
libgcj-bc
0 upgraded, 0 newly installed,
reassign 609659 gij
thanks
On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 05:27:01PM +0100, Matthias Klose wrote:
This bug is an another bug by Lionel, not (just) about the dependency. Read
it.
It requests a fallback to non-native if the mismatch happens.
which mismatch?
The condition causing libgcj linkage
Hi,
On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 05:07:54PM +0100, Matthias Klose wrote:
the package is there and it is called libgcj-bc. See dh_nativejava
how to build binary code for jar files. As long as packages are
built against libgcj-bc, there is no need to depend against the
right version of gcj/gij.
Hi,
On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 07:51:37PM +0100, Lionel Elie Mamane wrote:
- the version of _lenny_ of java-gcj-compat is installed (from gcc
4.3.2, libgcj9)
Where we again are in your broken system config with stable being on
highest priio but your system being (almost) completely unstable
Package: libgcj-bc
Version: 4.4.4-1
Severity: serious
I was just testing OpenOffice.org 1:3.2.1-1 (built on uptodate sid):
r...@frodo:~/Debian/Pakete/openoffice.org$ sudo dpkg -i
openoffice.org-gcj_3.2.1-1_amd64.deb
Selecting previously deselected package openoffice.org-gcj.
(Reading database
Hi,
On Fri, Jun 04, 2010 at 03:38:41PM +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
So the .shlibs adds a dependency on a non-existing version and thus
makes built -gcj packages uninstallable.
Thankfully any upload of gcc-defaults would most probably automagically
fix this, but I'd still prefer it saying
severity 580148 serious
thanks
On Wed, May 05, 2010 at 06:45:25PM +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
On Wed, May 05, 2010 at 05:53:18PM +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
Hi,
On Wed, May 05, 2010 at 05:38:31PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
tag 580148 + moreinfo
thanks
Which info do you need
retitle 580148 gcj: libgcj.spec: No such file or directory
thanks
On Thu, May 06, 2010 at 12:53:16PM +0200, Denis Barbier wrote:
I do not have access to those boxes, but IMHO gcj does not find
libgcj.spec because gcj from gcj-4.4-jdk_4.4.4-1 looks for
Hi,
On Wed, May 05, 2010 at 05:38:31PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
tag 580148 + moreinfo
thanks
Which info do you need? I can try on my armel sid when the currently
running testbuild for an other thing is over.
according to
On Wed, May 05, 2010 at 05:53:18PM +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
Hi,
On Wed, May 05, 2010 at 05:38:31PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
tag 580148 + moreinfo
thanks
Which info do you need? I can try on my armel sid when the currently
running testbuild for an other thing is over
[ @ -sparc/-openoffice: It goes about the repeated and random(!) build
failures and ICEs of OOo on sparc, see buildd.d.o ]
Hi again,
On Tue, Sep 08, 2009 at 09:36:31AM +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
On Sun, Sep 06, 2009 at 01:27:09PM +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
1) Martin, can you please
Hi,
Daniel Schepler wrote:
The problem is that neither gcj, gcj-jdk, nor java-gcj-compat-dev depends on
gcj-4.3 anymore. An apt-get install default-jdk-builddep gcj-4.3 works
fine
in a chroot. So it should be enough just to add gcj-4.3 as a dependency of
one of those packages.
Which
unmerge 529402
reopen 529402
thanks
Debian Bug Tracking System wrote:
reassign 529402 libgcj-common
forcemerge 529412 529402
forcemerge 529402 529725
thanks
Version: 1:4.4.0-6
Not really.
See e.g.
Package: java-gcj-compat-dev
Version: 1.0.80-2
Severity: serious
Selecting previously deselected package libgcj-common.
Unpacking libgcj-common (from .../libgcj-common_1%3a4.4.0-4_all.deb) ...
[...]
Selecting previously deselected package java-gcj-compat-dev.
Unpacking java-gcj-compat-dev (from
Hi,
Matthias Klose wrote:
no, this is likely a bug in OOo. before re-assigning this again:
- please find out if it is fixed in 3.0.x (apparently it is)
Yes.
- please find out if it is fixed in 2.4.2 (apparently you are not
interested in it).
Apparently not. Someone from Gentoo
clone 513743 -1
reassign -1 gcc-4.3
reopen -1
# maybe before, but that's the first version which appears in a buildog
# of a build causing a broken version
found -1 4.3.2-4
thanks
Hi,
ok, OOo is now fixed in testing by a bin-NMU with testings gcc (and that's
what will be in lenny), but it still
reassign 514830 gcc-4.3
found 514830 4.3.2-4
tag 514830 + sid
severity 514830 important
thanks
Hi,
Matthias Klose wrote:
reassign 514830 openoffice.org
thanks
No. The bug is worked around for Debian in lenny. Please don't give the OOo
packages a RC bug right now.
Set it to important or
# Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.10.35lenny1
# seems this was forgotten to be reopened aft
reopen 504323
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-gcc-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
found 504323 1:2.4.1-7
close 504323 1:3.0.1~rc1-2
thanks
Hi,
Kay Ramme - Sun Germany - Hamburg wrote:
seems to be an incompatibility of libgcc_s . Could you provide the
memory map of the process and may be some debug info for the bridge as
well?
If you tell me/Florian how to do it/what
notfixed 504323 1:3.0.1~rc1-2
thanks
Rene Engelhard wrote:
BTW; it works for me with 3.0.1 on amd64... Florian, can you confirm?
No, sorry, no idea why it worked before I wrote this, but it actually
doesn't...
Grüße/Regards,
René
--
.''`. René Engelhard -- Debian GNU/Linux Developer
tag 504323 - moreinfo
tag 504323 - unreproducible
retitle 504323 openoffice.org-core: Segmentation fault at startup with gcc 4.4
libs
forwarded 504323 d...@udk.openoffice.org
thanks
[ d...@udk: as usual, please Cc all involved! ]
Hi,
Florian Goujeon wrote:
It was indeed my mistake. I'm
Package: gcj, gij, libgcj-bc
Version: 4:4.3.0-7
Severity: serious
$ apt-cache show gcj | grep Depends
Depends: cpp (= 4:4.3.0-8), gij (= 4:4.3.0-8), gcj-4.3 (= 4.3.0-5)
gcj-4.3 |4.3.0-3 | testing | source, amd64, armel, i386, ia64,
mips, mipsel, powerpc, s390, sparc
gcj-4.3 |
clone 432191 -1 -2
reassign -1 gcj-4.2
reassign -2 gcj-4.3
block 478760 by -2
thanks
Hi Matthias,
you asked in January:
still missing more information; please check with gij-4.3/gcj-4.3
instead.
Also happened with 4.2, afair. (afair told you on IRC)
Yes, it still happens, see also
Package: ftp.debian.org
Severity: normal
gcc-defaults (1.70) unstable; urgency=low
[Matthias Klose]
* /usr/share/gcj/debian_defaults: Remove alpha, arm, hppa from
gcj_archs, remove alpha from gcj_native_archs, add armel to
gcj_archs and gcj_native_archs.
* Make GCC-4.3 the default
Package: java-gcj-compat-dev
Version: 1.0.76-2
Severity: serious
# apt-get install java-gcj-compat-dev
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree
Reading state information... Done
Some packages could not be installed. This may mean that you have
requested an impossible situation or if
Matthias Klose wrote:
Rene Engelhard writes:
Package: java-gcj-compat-dev
Version: 1.0.76-2
Severity: serious
looks like a newbie gone wild and filing bug reports without looking
into NEW first.
Irrelevant.
a) I am not a newbie. I just know it's not installable *now* and
therefore
Hi,
Matthias Klose wrote:
no, I don't care anymore about delays in NEW after having to wait
about 12 or 13 days for a new binary with the last gcj-4.2 upload. If
ftp-masters did make the decision that new binary packages have to
land in NEW, then they should process them in time. What do you
Hi,
Matthias Klose wrote:
Rene Engelhard writes:
Hi,
Matthias Klose wrote:
no, I don't care anymore about delays in NEW after having to wait
about 12 or 13 days for a new binary with the last gcj-4.2 upload. If
ftp-masters did make the decision that new binary packages have
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Package: gcj-4.1
Version: 4.1.2-12
Severity: important
(as requsted)
newer gcj-4.1s make OOos Java assistants simply hangs on ppc when you
choose them. This happens with and without -gcj and it
works with the Oo 2.2.1 backport on etch with etchs
Package: java-gcj-compat,java-gcj-compat-dev
Version: 1.0.65-10
Severity: important
Hi,
while building OOo (on amd64):
Making: ../../unxlngx6.pro/lib/libofficebean.so
ccache g++ -Wl,-z,combreloc -Wl,-z,defs -Wl,-rpath,'$ORIGIN'
-Wl,--hash-style=gnu -shared -L../../unxlngx6.pro/lib -L../lib
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Rene Engelhard wrote:
Rene Engelhard wrote:
file does not exist: /usr/lib/jvm/java-1.4.2-gcj-4.1-1.4.2.0/lib/libgij.so
file does not exist: /usr/lib/jvm/java-1.4.2-gcj-4.1-1.4.2.0/lib/libgcj.so
file does not exist:
/usr/lib/jvm/java
Matthias Klose wrote:
Rene Engelhard writes:
please add lib64 symlink
why? you should fix the build system to use lib, not lib64.
I disagree. lib64 is a common and normal assumption.
Please add a symlink lib64 - lib, ad one for /lib64 - /lib and
/usr/lib64 - /usr/lib done, too
Package: java-gcj-compat-dev
Version: 1.0.65-10
Severity: serious
Hi,
Richte java-gcj-compat-dev ein (1.0.65-10) ...
file does not exist: /usr/lib/jvm/java-1.4.2-gcj-4.1-1.4.2.0/lib/libgij.so
file does not exist: /usr/lib/jvm/java-1.4.2-gcj-4.1-1.4.2.0/lib/libgcj.so
file does not exist:
Package: gcj-4.1
Version: 4.1.2-4
Severity: serious
(as already mentioned on IRC).
the new gcj-4.1 apparently changed location of jawt (and other sos):
libgcj7-1-awt: /usr/lib/gcj-4.1-71/libjawt.so
java-gcj-compat-dev does excpects it on another path:
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 27 2007-04-26 13:50
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
clone 421301 -1
severity -1 important
retitle -1 needs update for new gcj-4.1
reassign -1 java-gcj-compat-dev
thanks
Rene Engelhard wrote:
java-gcj-compat-dev does excpects it on another path:
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 27 2007-04-26 13:50
/usr/lib
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Rene Engelhard wrote:
file does not exist: /usr/lib/jvm/java-1.4.2-gcj-4.1-1.4.2.0/lib/libgij.so
file does not exist: /usr/lib/jvm/java-1.4.2-gcj-4.1-1.4.2.0/lib/libgcj.so
file does not exist:
/usr/lib/jvm/java-1.4.2-gcj-4.1-1.4.2.0/lib
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Rene Engelhard wrote:
Richte java-gcj-compat-dev ein (1.0.65-10) ...
file does not exist: /usr/lib/jvm/java-1.4.2-gcj-4.1-1.4.2.0/lib/libgij.so
file does not exist: /usr/lib/jvm/java-1.4.2-gcj-4.1-1.4.2.0/lib/libgcj.so
file does not exist:
/usr
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
reopen 389539
thanks
Hi,
Unpacking java-gcj-compat (from .../java-gcj-compat_1.0.65-2_sparc.deb) ...
dpkg: error processing
/var/cache/apt/archives/java-gcj-compat_1.0.65-2_sparc.deb (--unpack):
trying to overwrite `/usr/bin/rebuild-gcj-db', which
Package: java-gcj-compat-dev
Version: 1.0.52-0
Severity: important
Tags: experimental
Hi,
I just tried bulding OOo on sparc with Java (and therefore with
java-gcj-compat-dev from experimental).
The configure check for jni.h failed, though because jni.h #include's
jni_md.h for which there is no
Package: g++-4.0
Version: 4.0.0-1
Severity: important
Tags: experimental
Hi,
ccache g++-4.0 -fsigned-char -fmessage-length=0 -c -I. -I. -I../inc
-I../../inc -I../../unx/inc -I../../unxlngppc.pro/inc -I.
-I/home/rene/OpenOffice.org/SRC680_m98/solver/680/unxlngppc.pro/inc/stl
Package: gcc-4.0
Severity: serious
Tags: experimental
[...]
/bin/sh ./libtool --mode=compile /home/rene/gcc-4.0-4.0.0/build/gcc/xgcc
-B/home/rene/gcc-4.0-4.0.0/build/gcc/ -B/usr/powerpc-linux/bin/
-B/usr/powerpc-linux/lib/ -isystem /usr/powerpc-linux/include -isystem
Daniel Burrows wrote:
gcc-3.4 is part of base, since it provides libgcc1 now.
and gcc-3.3 also because of libstdc++5...
Grüße/Regards,
René
--
.''`. René Engelhard -- Debian GNU/Linux Developer
: :' : http://www.debian.org | http://people.debian.org/~rene/
`. `' [EMAIL PROTECTED] |
Hi Matthias,
Matthias Klose wrote:
as I wrote on Fri, 23 May 2003 10:39:48 +0200, I am unable to
reproduce this report. Is somebody else able to confirm this report?
I unfortunately rm'ed the patches I used for 1.0.3 to get it
built to this point with g++ 3.3 from my disk since we a) were
Package: gcc-3.3
Version: 1:3.3-2
Severity: important
ccache gcc -D__KERNEL__ -I/usr/src/Linux/linux-2.4.20-apm/include -Wall
-Wstrict-prototypes -Wno-trigraphs -O2 -fno-strict-aliasing -fno-common
-fomit-frame-pointer -pipe -mpreferred-stack-boundary=2 -march=i686 -nostdinc
-iwithprefix
Hi,
Matthias Klose wrote:
Rene Engelhard writes:
Package: g++-3.3
Version: 1:3.3-2
Severity: important
Running the line with g++ -E gives nothing..
no output at all?
Right.
Regards,
Rene
pgpYax3OnoLvl.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Package: g++-3.3
Version: 1:3.3-2
Severity: important
Making: ../../../unxlngi4.pro/slo/urp_reader.obj
ccache g++ -fmessage-length=0 -c -I. -I. -I../inc -I../../../inc
-I../../../unx/inc -I../../../unxlngi4.pro/inc -I.
Package: g++-3.3
Version: 1:3.3-2
Severity: important
Tags: sid
Hi,
Compiling OpenOffice.org 1.0.3 with the g++ 3.3 suport patches
(IZ 13400) with g++ 3.3 gives us the following ICE:
http://people.debian.org/~rene/openoffice.org/oo103gcc3patchesice
OK, a talk on IRC gave some info (thanks
Hi,
during OOo's compilation the following is done:
ccache g++ -fmessage-length=0 -c -I. -I. -I../inc -I../../../inc
-I../../../unx/inc -I../../../unxlngi4.pro/inc -I.
Regards,
Rene
--
.''`. Rene Engelhard -- Debian GNU/Linux Developer
: :' : http://www.debian.org | http://people.debian.org/~rene/
`. `' [EMAIL PROTECTED] | GnuPG-Key ID: 248AEB73
`- Fingerprint: 41FA F208 28D4 7CA5 19BB 7AD9 F859 90B0 248A EB73
pgp8CMBZ1egog.pgp
Description: PGP
The GNU C preprocessor.
ii gcc 3:3.2.2-0The GNU C compiler.
ii libc6 2.3.1-14 GNU C Library: Shared libraries an
-- no debconf information
--
.''`. Rene Engelhard -- Debian GNU/Linux Developer
: :' : http://www.debian.org | http
82 matches
Mail list logo
