Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
severity 120333 important
Bug#120333: [mips] update-menus gets Bus Error
Severity set to `important'.
thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator, Debian Bugs
Is this a problem, that you can work around using g++-3.0 on mips? I
see the menu package up to date for mips. just wanting to reduce the
severity of the report from `grave' to `important'.
On Wed, Nov 28, 2001 at 03:29:31AM +, Colin Watson wrote:
On Mon, 26 Nov 2001 at 19:01:21 +0100,
On Thu, Dec 20, 2001 at 06:47:17PM +0100, Matthias Klose wrote:
Is this a problem, that you can work around using g++-3.0 on mips? I
see the menu package up to date for mips. just wanting to reduce the
severity of the report from `grave' to `important'.
Building with g++-3.0 fixes the problem -
Guido Guenther writes:
On Thu, Dec 20, 2001 at 06:47:17PM +0100, Matthias Klose wrote:
Is this a problem, that you can work around using g++-3.0 on mips? I
see the menu package up to date for mips. just wanting to reduce the
severity of the report from `grave' to `important'.
Building with
On Thu, Dec 20, 2001 at 06:59:07PM +0100, Guido Guenther wrote:
On Thu, Dec 20, 2001 at 06:47:17PM +0100, Matthias Klose wrote:
Is this a problem, that you can work around using g++-3.0 on mips? I
see the menu package up to date for mips. just wanting to reduce the
severity of the report
On Wed, 28 Nov 2001, Martin v. Loewis wrote:
I think there are still problems compiling glibc with gcc 3; glibc
will claim to export symbols from libgcc, when it really can't (since
the symbols in libgcc_s won't be incorporated into glibc). I believe
there are patches circulating to solve
On Tue, Nov 27, 2001 at 06:04:21PM +0100, Guido Guenther wrote:
[..]
Thanks for the testcase. I meant to make one when alpha started having EH
problems awhile back, but never got to itMatthias, I believe this one
will also catch the case that I saw on alpha.
Interesting enough the
On Tue, 27 Nov 2001, Martin v. Loewis wrote:
Unlikely. The original gdb backtrace indicated that somebody was
jumping to address 0. I think potential causes are:
1. dynamic initialization of a shared library has not been carried
out. It would be interesting to verify that all shared
8 matches
Mail list logo
