That would remove the need to define _GNU_SOURCE in the command line.
There are other related problems, such as #108663. It seems that
_GNU_SOURCE is required anyway when using g++-3.0.
Well, I'm proposing to fix the dependency of libstdc++ to require
_GNU_SOURCE (which is passed through
Matthias Klose wrote:
I am using debian/woody with up to date packages from debian.org:
from [EMAIL PROTECTED]
please retest with the current gcc-3.0 (3.0.3-1) package from
unstable.
I don't like to mess up my woody with unstable packages. With woody and
gcc 3.02 ich get the reported bug. I
Package: libgcj2
Version: 1:3.0.3-1
Severity: normal
/usr/bin/gcj is a link to /usr/bin/gcj-3.0, so shouldn't there
be a link /usr/bin/gij, linked to /usr/bin/gij-3.0 ?
--
paul
-- System Information
Debian Release: 3.0
Architecture: i386
Kernel: Linux funkiest 2.4.17 #1 Thu Dec 27 01:46:21
Paul J. Keenan writes:
Package: libgcj2
Version: 1:3.0.3-1
Severity: normal
/usr/bin/gcj is a link to /usr/bin/gcj-3.0, so shouldn't there
be a link /usr/bin/gij, linked to /usr/bin/gij-3.0 ?
yes, it's in the gij package.
Martin v. Loewis writes:
I can't see a reason for libstdc++ requiring _GNU_SOURCE except for the
desire to re-export symbols in std::, for which I would propose a
different strategy.
It would help to know why this was done in the first place; there could be
other reasons.
Sure,
On Mon, Dec 31, 2001 at 01:38:06AM +0100, Matthias Klose wrote:
Martin v. Loewis writes:
I can't see a reason for libstdc++ requiring _GNU_SOURCE except for the
desire to re-export symbols in std::, for which I would propose a
different strategy.
It would help to know why this
6 matches
Mail list logo
