On 12/17/19 12:48 PM, Matthias Klose wrote:
> On 06.12.19 20:32, Simon McVittie wrote:
>> On Fri, 06 Dec 2019 at 17:49:09 +0100, Matthias Klose wrote:
>>> On 06.12.19 17:36, Simon McVittie wrote:
I notice gcc-10 has switched from packaging libgcc_s.so.1 as
"libgcc1" to the
On 06.12.19 20:32, Simon McVittie wrote:
> On Fri, 06 Dec 2019 at 17:49:09 +0100, Matthias Klose wrote:
>> On 06.12.19 17:36, Simon McVittie wrote:
>>> I notice gcc-10 has switched from packaging libgcc_s.so.1 as
>>> "libgcc1" to the Policy-recommended name libgcc-s1.
>>
>> it's not an old
On Fri, 06 Dec 2019 at 17:49:09 +0100, Matthias Klose wrote:
> On 06.12.19 17:36, Simon McVittie wrote:
> > I notice gcc-10 has switched from packaging libgcc_s.so.1 as
> > "libgcc1" to the Policy-recommended name libgcc-s1.
>
> it's not an old version, it's the same version. Is this still an
On 06.12.19 17:36, Simon McVittie wrote:
> Package: libgcc-s1
> Version: 10-20191205-1
> Severity: important
>
> I notice gcc-10 has switched from packaging libgcc_s.so.1 as
> "libgcc1" to the Policy-recommended name libgcc-s1. Because libgcc-s1
> contains /usr/lib/MULTIARCH/libgcc_s.so.1 and
Package: libgcc-s1
Version: 10-20191205-1
Severity: important
I notice gcc-10 has switched from packaging libgcc_s.so.1 as
"libgcc1" to the Policy-recommended name libgcc-s1. Because libgcc-s1
contains /usr/lib/MULTIARCH/libgcc_s.so.1 and libgcc1 contains
/lib/MULTIARCH/libgcc_s.so.1, the new
5 matches
Mail list logo