Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
found 140201 gcc-3.0/3.0.ds6-0pre010525
Bug #140201 [libstdc++6] [PR libstdc++/21334] race condition in libstdc++3
(basic_string.tcc)
The source gcc-3.0 and version 3.0.ds6-0pre010525 do not appear to match any
binary packages
Marked as found
PROTECTED]; Sun, 25 Sep 2005 19:08:30 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from pryzbyj by andromeda with local (Exim 4.52)
id 1EJfbg-CP-Ty
for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Sun, 25 Sep 2005 19:08:29 -0400
Date: Sun, 25 Sep 2005 19:08:28 -0400
To: Debian BTS Submission [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: gcc-3.0: manpage
Package: gcc-4.0
Version: 4.0.1-2
File: /usr/share/man/man1/gcc.1.gz
Severity: minor
The manpage section describing -fwrapv says:
This flag enables some optimizations and disables other.
Here, other should be pluaralized to others.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a
Submitter-Id: net
Originator:Friedemann Buergel
Organization: Weblaw AG, CH-3008 Bern, ++41-31-3805777, www.weblaw.ch
Confidential: no
Synopsis: Optimizer Bug in gcc 3.0, 3.3 and 3.4
Severity: critical
Priority: medium
Category: c
Class: wrong-code
Release
-0005Lf-00; Mon, 26 Nov 2001 20:01:28 +0100
Received: (nullmailer pid 20561 invoked by uid 1001);
Mon, 26 Nov 2001 19:01:26 -
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2001 20:01:26 +0100
From: Bill Allombert [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Debian Bug Tracking System [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: On i386, gcc-3.0 allows
'
/tmp/cc2uXoLV.s:19: Error: suffix or operands invalid for `cmp'
/tmp/cc2uXoLV.s:31: Error: suffix or operands invalid for `inc'
This fails with both woody gcc-2.95 and gcc-3.0, and potato gcc.
potato gcc272 reject dollars in identifier by default.
gcc272 -fdollars-in-identifiers fails.
The default
Have you been seeking Medi-cations?
You can get them here.
Your order will arrive the next day and you don't need to show a prescripti-on.
http://fillet.wewss.com
Julie detoxify. Richie pincushion putative harlem cooky holeable. Eloy waals
bestirring brown rotc. Freddie traverse turin. Reggie
Package: ftp.debian.org
See http://lists.debian.org/debian-gcc/2004/06/msg00372.html
On Wed, 30 Jun 2004, Grant Grundler wrote:
On Tue, Jun 29, 2004 at 08:11:46PM +0300, Martin-?ric Racine wrote:
Wasn't PALO (the bootloader) also build-dependant upon 3.0 at some point?
Not really. It was a coincendence palo built with gcc 3.0 worked
and palo built with later gcc didn't
On Tue, Jun 29, 2004 at 08:11:46PM +0300, Martin-?ric Racine wrote:
Wasn't PALO (the bootloader) also build-dependant upon 3.0 at some point?
Not really. It was a coincendence palo built with gcc 3.0 worked
and palo built with later gcc didn't. The bug was in palo and I'm
pretty sure paul fixed
On Mon, 28 Jun 2004, Matthias Klose wrote:
Matthew Wilcox writes:
On Mon, Jun 28, 2004 at 07:08:36PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
hppa is the only platform with gcc-3.0/g++-3.0. Is this version still
needed for hppa builds, or can it be removed? On all other platforms,
we just build
hppa is the only platform with gcc-3.0/g++-3.0. Is this version still
needed for hppa builds, or can it be removed? On all other platforms,
we just build the libstdc++ runtime library (but doesn't seem to be
needed, I haven't seen third party software referencing this libstdc++
library version
On Mon, Jun 28, 2004 at 07:08:36PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
hppa is the only platform with gcc-3.0/g++-3.0. Is this version still
needed for hppa builds, or can it be removed? On all other platforms,
we just build the libstdc++ runtime library (but doesn't seem to be
needed, I haven't seen
Matthew Wilcox writes:
On Mon, Jun 28, 2004 at 07:08:36PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
hppa is the only platform with gcc-3.0/g++-3.0. Is this version still
needed for hppa builds, or can it be removed? On all other platforms,
we just build the libstdc++ runtime library (but doesn't seem
Package: gcc-3.0
Version: 1:3.0.4-7
Severity: important
Tags: sid
This occurs during installation of Garnome version rc_2.6.1, in
directory
fifth-toe/xine-lib/work/main.d/xine-lib-1-rc3c/src/libffmpeg/libavcodec/
The error message is:
dsputil.c: In function `put_no_rnd_pixels16_y2_c':
dsputil.c
Your message dated Tue, 13 Jan 2004 20:13:13 +0100
with message-id [EMAIL PROTECTED]
and subject line Bug#224608: gcc-3.0: Wrong build requirements
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case
Package: gcc-3.0
Version: 1:3.0.4-7
Severity: normal
Current source package of gcc-3.0 (woody) does not build. It requires dot
contained
in non-free graphviz, but does not specify that.
pgpvzxGP0crmy.pgp
Description: PGP signature
System [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: gcc-3.0: Use 'update-alternatives' to set default compiler
X-Mailer: reportbug 1.50
Date: Fri, 24 May 2002 13:50:32 +0200
Message-Id: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Package: gcc-3.0
Version: 1:3.0.4-9
Severity: wishlist
gcc-3.0 and gcc-3.1
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Debian Bug Tracking System [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: gcc-3.0: could gcc-3.0 be hooked into the alternatives system?
X-Reportbug-Version: 1.35
X-Mailer: reportbug 1.35
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 15:05:14 +0100
Message-Id: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Package
PROTECTED]; Sun, 11 Nov 2001 01:40:51 +
Received: from laptop by plato.systems with local (Exim 3.32 #1 (Debian))
id 162jcB-0005nA-00
for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Sun, 11 Nov 2001 01:40:51 +
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: gcc-3.0: doesn't depend on gcc
Mail-Copies-To: never
From: James
) (closes: #176387).
+ ICE in mem_loc_descriptor when optimizing (closes: #178909).
+ ICE in gen_reg_rtx when optimizing (closes: #178965).
+ Optimisation leads to unaligned access in memcpy (closes: #136659).
.
* Closed reports reported against gcc-3.0 and fixed in gcc
to unaligned access in memcpy (closes: #136659).
.
* Closed reports reported against gcc-3.0 and fixed in gcc-3.2.x:
- General:
+ Use mkstemp instead of mktemp (closed: #127802).
- Preprocessor:
+ Fix redundant error message from cpp (closed: #100722).
- C
(wrong code) (closes: #176387).
+ ICE in mem_loc_descriptor when optimizing (closes: #178909).
+ ICE in gen_reg_rtx when optimizing (closes: #178965).
+ Optimisation leads to unaligned access in memcpy (closes: #136659).
.
* Closed reports reported against gcc-3.0
when optimizing (closes: #178909).
+ ICE in gen_reg_rtx when optimizing (closes: #178965).
+ Optimisation leads to unaligned access in memcpy (closes: #136659).
.
* Closed reports reported against gcc-3.0 and fixed in gcc-3.2.x:
- General:
+ Use mkstemp instead
in gen_reg_rtx when optimizing (closes: #178965).
+ Optimisation leads to unaligned access in memcpy (closes: #136659).
.
* Closed reports reported against gcc-3.0 and fixed in gcc-3.2.x:
- General:
+ Use mkstemp instead of mktemp (closed: #127802).
- Preprocessor
in gen_reg_rtx when optimizing (closes: #178965).
+ Optimisation leads to unaligned access in memcpy (closes: #136659).
.
* Closed reports reported against gcc-3.0 and fixed in gcc-3.2.x:
- General:
+ Use mkstemp instead of mktemp (closed: #127802).
- Preprocessor:
+ Fix
in gen_reg_rtx when optimizing (closes: #178965).
+ Optimisation leads to unaligned access in memcpy (closes: #136659).
.
* Closed reports reported against gcc-3.0 and fixed in gcc-3.2.x:
- General:
+ Use mkstemp instead of mktemp (closed: #127802).
- Preprocessor
in gen_reg_rtx when optimizing (closes: #178965).
+ Optimisation leads to unaligned access in memcpy (closes: #136659).
.
* Closed reports reported against gcc-3.0 and fixed in gcc-3.2.x:
- General:
+ Use mkstemp instead of mktemp (closed: #127802).
- Preprocessor:
+ Fix
regression (wrong code) (closes: #176387).
+ ICE in mem_loc_descriptor when optimizing (closes: #178909).
+ ICE in gen_reg_rtx when optimizing (closes: #178965).
+ Optimisation leads to unaligned access in memcpy (closes: #136659).
.
* Closed reports reported against gcc-3.0
) (closes: #176387).
+ ICE in mem_loc_descriptor when optimizing (closes: #178909).
+ ICE in gen_reg_rtx when optimizing (closes: #178965).
+ Optimisation leads to unaligned access in memcpy (closes: #136659).
.
* Closed reports reported against gcc-3.0 and fixed in gcc-3.2
Package: gcc-3.0
Version: 1:3.0.4-13
Severity: normal
gcc 3.0 is not buildable, because it depends on libc6.1-dev, which does
not exist in the archive - it should depend on libc6-dev, or am i wrong?
-- System Information:
Debian Release: testing/unstable
Architecture: i386
Kernel: Linux
Your message dated Mon, 13 Jan 2003 09:21:42 -0800
with message-id [EMAIL PROTECTED]
and subject line Bug#176533: gcc-3.0 not buildable, wrong build-dep
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case
There are disparities between your recently accepted upload and the
override file for the following file(s):
gcc-3.0-base_3.0.4-14_i386.deb: priority is overridden from oldlibs to standard.
Either the package or the override file is incorrect. If you think
the override is correct
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
reassign 94701 gcc-3.2
Bug#94701: [fixed in 3.3] Duplicate loop conditions even with -Os
Bug reassigned from package `gcc-3.0' to `gcc-3.2'.
reassign 95318 gcc-3.2
Bug#95318: [fixed on 3.3/HEAD: PR optimization/2962] unnecessary cwtl
Bug reassigned
Package: gcc-3.0
Severity: serious
Version: 1:3.0.4ds3-14
This version builds the libstdc++ runtime only (and for hppa the C
compiler). Held it back, until the gcc-3.2 transition hits testing.
16Ikhr-0004BP-00; Mon, 24 Dec 2001 22:04:55 -0800
From: Agthorr [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Debian Bug Tracking System [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: gcc-3.0: Improper warning when casting from pointer to non-const array
to const
X-Reportbug-Version: 1.36
X-Mailer: reportbug 1.36
Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2001 22:04:54
Your message dated Sat, 11 Jan 2003 12:30:57 +0100
with message-id [EMAIL PROTECTED]
and subject line closing FTBFS reports for gcc-3.0
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your
Whoops, forgot to Cc this to the bug report...
Matthias Klose [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Daniel Schepler writes:
Package: gcc-3.0
Version: 3.0.4ds3-13
Severity: serious
When I try to build gcc-3.0 on unstable, first there are bison errors
in java-parse.y.
please could you send me
Your message dated Fri, 27 Dec 2002 18:03:04 +0100
with message-id [EMAIL PROTECTED]
and subject line Bug#121668: gcc-3.0: Internal compiler error on IA64
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: gcc-3.0: compiled code with gcc 3.0 is slow and big :-(
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Mailer: bug 3.3.9
Message-Id: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2001 11:08:29 +0200 (CEST)
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Package: gcc-3.0
Version: 1:3.0-2
Severity: wishlist
Hi!
I'm Gabor
Package: gcc-3.0
Version: 3.0.4ds3-13
Severity: serious
gcc-3.0 fails to build from source on i386, when doing a rebuild inside chroot.
I am filing this bug to notify you that I failed to build your
package from source in the current sid distribution.
It is a serious problem that your source
Package: gcc-3.0
Version: 3.0.4ds3-13
Severity: serious
When I try to build gcc-3.0 on unstable, first there are bison errors
in java-parse.y. If I fix those, then I get more errors:
...
/tmp/buildd/gcc-3.0-3.0.4ds3/build/gcc/xgcc
-B/tmp/buildd/gcc-3.0-3.0.4ds3/build/gcc/ -nostdinc++
-L/tmp
On Wed, Aug 21, 2002 at 11:55:27AM +0300, Alexei Khlebnikov wrote:
I think this program should not terminate at all because i will
always be one greater than oldi.
I think gcc3.0 has a problem with no optimization then but since
there is later version that works gcc 3.1.1, upgrade.
On Wed, Aug 21, 2002 at 11:28:47PM -0400, Carlos O'Donell wrote:
On Wed, Aug 21, 2002 at 11:55:27AM +0300, Alexei Khlebnikov wrote:
I think this program should not terminate at all because i will
always be one greater than oldi.
I think gcc3.0 has a problem with no optimization then but
On Wed, Aug 21, 2002 at 11:55:27AM +0300, Alexei Khlebnikov wrote:
I think this program should not terminate at all because i will
always be one greater than oldi.
I think gcc3.0 has a problem with no optimization then but since
there is later version that works gcc 3.1.1, upgrade.
With
With no optimization the program runs correctly by the rules of integers
representation in memory. See the explanation below.
I must have been asleep last night :} Thanks Alexei!
gcc-3.1 generates similar code, don't have 3.2 on an i386 box
to test. Though 3.2 on an hppa box
: 55 push %ebp
80483c1: 89 e5 mov%esp,%ebp
80483c3: eb fe jmp80483c3 main+0x3
80483c5: 90 nop
...
gcc-3.0 and 3.1 optimize it away:
08048304 main:
8048304: 55
Submitter-Id: net
Originator:Thomas Deselaers
Organization:
Confidential: no
Synopsis: gcc-3.0 optimization bug on debian GNU/Linux on x86 with very simple
program
Severity: non-critical
Priority: medium
Category: c
Class: wrong-code
Release: 3.0.4 (Debian
I think this program should not terminate at all because i will
always be one greater than oldi.
I think gcc3.0 has a problem with no optimization then but since
there is later version that works gcc 3.1.1, upgrade.
Thanks,
Andrew Pinski
trace
ioldi
00
10check here
11
21
;
}
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ gcc-3.0 -O0 -o test test.c
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ ./test
(Attach gdb, look at stuff, it's not stopping) ^C
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ gcc-3.0 -o test test.c
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ ./test
(Attach gdb, look at stuff, it's not stopping) ^C
---
Maybe you've been bad to your gcc
Your message dated Sat, 20 Jul 2002 14:02:26 -0400
with message-id [EMAIL PROTECTED]
and subject line Bug#149037: fixed in gcc-3.0 1:3.0.4ds3-11
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case
Your message dated Sat, 20 Jul 2002 14:02:26 -0400
with message-id [EMAIL PROTECTED]
and subject line Bug#152601: fixed in gcc-3.0 1:3.0.4ds3-11
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case
Moin,
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ dpkg -S
/usr/lib/gcc-lib/hppa-linux/3.0.4/libgcc_s.so
gcc-3.0: /usr/lib/gcc-lib/hppa-linux/3.0.4/libgcc_s.so
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ dpkg -L libgcc1
/.
/usr
/usr/share
/usr/share/doc
/usr/share/doc/libgcc1
/usr/share/doc/libgcc1/copyright
/usr/share/doc/libgcc1
Package: gcc-3.0
Version: 1:3.0.4-7
Severity: normal
AIDE reported this dead symlink:
lrwxrwxrwx1 root root 18 Jul 5 20:16
/usr/lib/gcc-lib/hppa-linux/3.0.4/libgcc_s.so - /lib/libgcc_s.so.1
Regards
Herbert.
-- System Information
Debian Release: 3.0
Kernel Version
: (qmail 20231 invoked by uid 1000); 8 Jun 2001 22:51:52 -
Date: 8 Jun 2001 22:51:52 -
Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: gcc-3.0: internal compiler error: unrecognized insn
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Mailer: bug 3.3.9
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Package: gcc-3.0
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
retitle 127802 [fixed in gcc-3.1] use of mktemp is dangerous
Bug#127802: gcc-3.0: use of mktemp is dangerous
Changed Bug title.
tags 127802 + fixed
Bug#127802: [fixed in gcc-3.1] use of mktemp is dangerous
Tags added: fixed
thanks
Stopping
+0100
From: José Luis González [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: gcc-3.0: Weird SegFault on exit()
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Mailer: bug 3.3.10
Message-Id: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sender: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Jos=E9_Luis_Gonz=E1lez_Gonz=E1lez?= [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 02 Dec 2001 16:26:52 +0100
Delivered-To: [EMAIL
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
retitle 140995 [fixed in gcc-3.1] -Wswitch (also part of -Wall) is broken
Bug#140995: gcc-3.0: -Wswitch (also part of -Wall) is broken
Changed Bug title.
tags 140995 + fixed
Bug#140995: [fixed in gcc-3.1] -Wswitch (also part of -Wall) is broken
Tags
0m9.825s real0m4.322s real0m4.327s
user0m8.840s user0m3.700s user0m3.690s
sys 0m0.540s sys 0m0.600s sys 0m0.590s
gcc-3.0: real0m16.070s real0m6.147s real0m6.079s
user0m15.710s user
Package: gcc-3.0
Version: 1:3.0.4-9
Severity: wishlist
gcc-3.0 and gcc-3.1 install gcc-3.0 and gcc-3.1 in /usr/bin, while
gcc (ver 2.95) install /usr/bin/gcc. It would be more streamlined
to use /etc/alternatives to point to one of the compilers.
The same applies for manpages and other
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
reassign 148015 gcc
Bug#148015: gcc-3.0: Use 'update-alternatives' to set default compiler
Bug reassigned from package `gcc-3.0' to `gcc'.
tags 148015 + wontfix
Bug#148015: gcc-3.0: Use 'update-alternatives' to set default compiler
Tags added: wontfix
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 08:09:22AM +0200, Martin Rasp wrote:
Hi.
When compiling QT3 KDE3 under Debian Woody with gcc-3.0 and g++-3.0 KDE3
crashes during startup. When compiling with gcc-2.95 and g++-2.95 it's
working fine.
Is it because the linked debian libraries are compilied
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 10:15:33PM -, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Synopsis: gcc 3.0 0526 fails to build on mips*-linux
State-Changed-From-To: analyzed-feedback
State-Changed-By: rth
State-Changed-When: Tue Apr 9 15:15:32 2002
State-Changed-Why:
Something's screwy here with your setup
Synopsis: gcc 3.0 0526 fails to build on mips*-linux
State-Changed-From-To: analyzed-feedback
State-Changed-By: rth
State-Changed-When: Tue Apr 9 15:15:32 2002
State-Changed-Why:
Something's screwy here with your setup. string.h is
included by gcc/tsystem.h iff -Dinhibit_libc
Package: gcc-3.0
Version: 1:3.0.4-6
Severity: normal
The following program generates a superfluous warning when compiled
with -std=c99 or -std=gnu99.
#include stdlib.h
int main (void) __attribute__ ((noreturn));
int main
Package: gcc-3.0
Version: 1:3.0.4-6
Severity: normal
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/tmp$ gcc-2.95 -c foo.c
foo.c: In function `foo':
foo.c:6: field `d' has incomplete type
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/tmp$ gcc-3.0 -c foo.c
foo.c: In function `foo':
foo.c:8: Internal compiler error in incomplete_type_error, at c
Your message dated Thu, 07 Mar 2002 04:32:23 -0500
with message-id [EMAIL PROTECTED]
and subject line Bug#135709: fixed in gcc-3.0 1:3.0.4ds3-2
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case
Erich Schubert [EMAIL PROTECTED] cum veritate scripsit:
Should we do a debconf item for this? I'm getting tired of seeing this
question pop up at least once every two weeks for months now...and I'm
sure I'm not alone :-)
Maybe tag the bug wontfix and leave it open?
I wouldn't consider
Package: gcc-3.0
Version: 1:3.0.4-1
Severity: normal
Shouldn't gcc-3.0 be an alternative for cc? maybe for gcc too?
/usr/bin/cc is provided by gcc, but not by gcc-3.0 ?
Greetings,
erich
-- System Information
Debian Release: 3.0
Architecture: i386
Kernel: Linux marvin.xmldesign.de 2.4.18-pre9
On Fri, 1 Mar 2002, Erich Schubert wrote:
Package: gcc-3.0
Version: 1:3.0.4-1
Severity: normal
Shouldn't gcc-3.0 be an alternative for cc? maybe for gcc too?
/usr/bin/cc is provided by gcc, but not by gcc-3.0 ?
The short answer is no, gcc is just package built from gcc-defaults
Your message dated Fri, 1 Mar 2002 16:47:29 -0500 (EST)
with message-id [EMAIL PROTECTED]
and subject line Bug#136351: gcc-3.0: missing alternatives?
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case
Should we do a debconf item for this? I'm getting tired of seeing this
question pop up at least once every two weeks for months now...and I'm
sure I'm not alone :-)
Maybe tag the bug wontfix and leave it open?
I wouldn't consider this bug as fixed, but as should not be fixed.
Actually this
Package: gcc-3.0
Version: 1:3.0.4-1
Perhaps not an issue, but I thought I'd at least let you know.
| Unpacking replacement gcc-3.0 ...
| dpkg - warning, overriding problem because --force enabled:
| trying to overwrite `/lib/64/libgcc_s_64.so', which is also in package
libgcc1-sparc64
Package: gcc-3.0
Version: 1:3.0.4ds2-0pre020209
Severity: serious
gcc-3.0-base didn't get built by any of my buildds making new gcc-3.0
nicely uninstallable...
--
James
Your message dated Sun, 10 Feb 2002 15:00:55 -0500
with message-id [EMAIL PROTECTED]
and subject line Bug#130422: fixed in gcc-3.0 1:3.0.4ds2-0pre020209
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case
Package: gcc-3.0
Version: 1:3.0.3-1
gcc-3.0 should provide gcc, then pentium-builder for example would be able
to be installed on a gcc-3.0 system and as the originarl reporter hinted at,
its very annoying that /etc/alternatives et al don't properly ask which gcc
you want as the system default
Stuart T.R.Rowan [EMAIL PROTECTED] cum veritate scripsit:
gcc-3.0 should provide gcc, then pentium-builder for example would be able
to be installed on a gcc-3.0 system and as the originarl reporter hinted at,
its very annoying that /etc/alternatives et al don't properly ask which gcc
you
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
reassign 119064 gcc
Bug#119064: gcc-3.0: doesn't depend on gcc
Bug reassigned from package `gcc-3.0' to `gcc'.
severity 119064 wishlist
Bug#119064: gcc-3.0: doesn't depend on gcc
Severity set to `wishlist'.
tags 119064 + wontfix
Bug#119064: gcc-3.0
No it can't - it depends upon the gcc package. the only package which
supplies this dependency is gcc-2.95 hence the problem.
On Fri, 2002-02-01 at 12:45, Junichi Uekawa wrote:
Stuart T.R.Rowan [EMAIL PROTECTED] cum veritate scripsit:
gcc-3.0 should provide gcc, then pentium-builder
Sorry there was an error in the previous message the reply to field is
wrong the reply-to was suppposed to be [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Fri, 2002-02-01 at 12:45, Junichi Uekawa wrote:
Stuart T.R.Rowan [EMAIL PROTECTED] cum veritate scripsit:
gcc-3.0 should provide gcc, then pentium-builder
Stuart Rowan [EMAIL PROTECTED] cum veritate scripsit:
gcc is provided by gcc-defaults, not gcc-2.95
regards,
junichi
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] : Junichi Uekawa http://www.netfort.gr.jp/~dancer
GPG Fingerprint : 17D6 120E 4455 1832 9423 7447 3059 BF92 CD37 56F4
nonetheless)
-Original Message-
From: Stuart T. R. Rowan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Stuart
Rowan
Sent: Friday, February 01, 2002 7:39 AM
To: Junichi Uekawa
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Bug#119064: gcc-3.0: gcc should be a `Provides'
No it can't - it depends upon the gcc
Package: gcc-3.0
Version: 1:3.0.3-1
Severity: normal
Hi,
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~% cat bug.c
struct descr {
int len;
char data[];
};
int foo() {
struct descr s1 = { 3, FOO };
}
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~% /usr/bin/gcc-3.0 bug.c
bug.c: In function `foo':
bug.c:6: Internal error: Segmentation
Your message dated Tue, 29 Jan 2002 15:03:53 -0500
with message-id [EMAIL PROTECTED]
and subject line Bug#128178: fixed in gcc-3.0 1:3.0.4ds0-0pre020127
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
reassign 129691 gcc-3.0-sparc64
Bug#129691: fakeroot_0.4.5-2.1(unstable/sparc): missing build-depends
Bug reassigned from package `fakeroot' to `gcc-3.0-sparc64'.
thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
Debian bug
Title: GCC 3.0 on potato
Dear Debian Developers,
I am using potato 2.2.r3 and the standard gcc 2.9xx stable.
I am working on my free time on a patch to the GCC3.0
it changes the ast-tree-dumper to output XML and streams the results to an external process.
the project is hosted on http
On Sun, Jan 20, 2002 at 04:53:20PM -0500, Ben Collins wrote:
This fails
g++-3.0 -o bin/program o/object1.o ... -static
because gcc-3.0 cannot find the libgcc_s.a file.
/usr/bin/ld: cannot find -lgcc_s
It shouldn't be looking for libgcc_s.a, it should use libgcc.a (which
-static -lstdc++ -lm -lgcc_s -lgcc -lc -lgcc_s -lgcc
Something is screwy with your setup then. The command works for me with
no problem. Which version of the g++-3.0 package do you have installed?
Any environment variables?
--
Package: gcc-3.0
Version: 1:3.0.3-1
Severity: normal
The -Wconversion option to gcc is documented as doing two things:
`-Wconversion'
Warn if a prototype causes a type conversion that is different
from what would
On top of all the other reasons already mentioned, the memory expansion
code for basic_string in 3.0 wasn't as good as it could be (and it
wasn't strictly conforming in some cases). These problems have already
been fixed for 3.1; there are some spiffy benchmarks in the libstdc++
mailing list
Phil Edwards writes:
On top of all the other reasons already mentioned, the memory expansion
code for basic_string in 3.0 wasn't as good as it could be (and it
wasn't strictly conforming in some cases). These problems have already
been fixed for 3.1; there are some spiffy benchmarks in the
and then
start sweating over speed and whatnot; now we're doing that.
The library 3.0.95 snapshot is the 3.1 sources as of a few weeks ago,
with the exception-handling bits tweaked to work with GCC 3.0.
Phil
--
If ye love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude greater
than the animating
bits tweaked to work with GCC 3.0.
assume we want to get 3.0.95 into the Debian woody release, we have to
- separate out the current libstdc++.{so,a} in the gcc-lib dir into
a libstdc++3-dev package.
- make new libstdc++3.0.95 and libstdc++3.0.95-dev packages.
- make libstdc++3-dev and libstdc
On Wed, Jan 09, 2002 at 03:51:40AM +0100, Matthias Klose wrote:
Phil Edwards writes:
The library 3.0.95 snapshot is the 3.1 sources as of a few weeks ago,
with the exception-handling bits tweaked to work with GCC 3.0.
assume we want to get 3.0.95 into the Debian woody release, we have
Package: gcc-3.0
Version: 1:3.0.3-1
Severity: normal
Hi ..
I updated my debian-sparc today, its a daily updated woody.
But today I got this by replacing gcc-3.0-sparc64:
Preparing to replace gcc-3.0-sparc64 1:3.0.2-4 (using
.../gcc-3.0-sparc64_1%3a3.0.3-1_sparc.deb) ...
dpkg-divert: rename
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Debian Bug Tracking System) writes:
This is an automatic notification regarding your Bug report
#127783: gcc-3.0-source: java selftest fail,
which was filed against the gcc-3.0 package.
It has been closed by one of the developers, namely
Matthias Klose [EMAIL PROTECTED
Hi,
Morten Brix Pedersen wrote:
int main()
{
string test = IUHASISAHDNI;
vectorstring vec;
for (int i = 0; i = 50; ++i) {
string newstr;
test += NAWNASDKJNKNN;
newstr = test;
String assignments are threadsafe now with gcc-3.0, so that will have
Package: gcc-3.0
Version: 1:3.0.3-1
I don't know if it's valid for this bug report, but all code I have tried is
slower in g++ 3, here's a simple example:
(numbers first, code in the bottom)
mbp:~$ g++ benchmark.cpp ; ls -l a.out ; time a.out ; g++-3.0 benchmark.cpp
; ls -l a.out ; time a.out
But an unexpected failure suggests a new error. That should fail and
stop the build.
That impression is incorrect. An unexpected failure may or may not be
a new error. If you are concerned about unexpected failures, you'd
have to investigate them. Stopping the build is not appropriate, since
Your message dated Sat, 5 Jan 2002 03:10:20 +0100
with message-id [EMAIL PROTECTED]
and subject line Bug#127783: gcc-3.0-source: java selftest fail
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case
1 - 100 of 245 matches
Mail list logo
