Results for 3.4.4 20041218 (prerelease) (Debian 3.4.3-7) testsuite on mipsel-linux

2005-01-11 Thread Matthias Klose
LAST_UPDATED: Sat Dec 18 22:04:21 UTC 2004 Native configuration is mipsel-linux (remake) === gpc tests === Running target any FAIL: adam3i.pas FAIL: adam3j.pas FAIL: adam3o.pas FAIL: adam3p.pas FAIL: assumptions.pas FAIL: binrdwt.pas FAIL: bitfields.pas FAIL: chris4.pas FAIL:

Results for 3.4.4 20041218 (prerelease) (Debian 3.4.3-7) testsuite on mips-linux

2005-01-12 Thread Matthias Klose
LAST_UPDATED: Sat Dec 18 22:04:21 UTC 2004 Native configuration is mips-linux (r5k) === gpc tests === Running target any FAIL: adam3i.pas FAIL: adam3j.pas FAIL: adam3o.pas FAIL: adam3p.pas FAIL: assumptions.pas FAIL: binrdwt.pas FAIL: bitfields.pas FAIL: chris4.pas FAIL:

Results for 4.0.0 20050110 (experimental) testsuite on s390-ibm-linux-gnu

2005-01-12 Thread Matthias Klose
LAST_UPDATED: Tue Jan 11 00:09:12 UTC 2005 === acats tests === FAIL: a26007a FAIL: ad8011a FAIL: c23003a FAIL: c23003b FAIL: c23003g FAIL: c23003i FAIL: c32001e FAIL: c34002a FAIL: c35502d FAIL: c35502f FAIL: c35503d FAIL: c35503f FAIL: c37402a FAIL:

Bug#290483: gij-3.4 suggests libgcj-awt5 but not found. Should be libgcj5-awt?

2005-01-16 Thread Matthias Klose
Egon Willighagen writes: Package: gij-3.4 Severity: normal gij-3.4 suggests libgcj-awt5 but not found. Should be libgcj5-awt? thanks, fixed for the next upload. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Bug#291762: gcj-3.4 should depend on libgcj5-dev

2005-01-22 Thread Matthias Klose
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Package: gcj-3.4 Severity: normal Subject says it all. I installed gcj-3.4 and it gave an error until I installed libgcj5-dev. yes, you don't need it for compiling to byte code. It's a recommendation only. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a

Bug#291497: gcc-4.0: FTBFS? in experimental (arm)

2005-01-29 Thread Matthias Klose
Kenshi Muto writes: severity 291497 important thanks 4.0ds4-0pre5 still fails. Full log is: http://experimental.ftbfs.de/fetch.php?pkg=gcc-4.0ver=4.0ds4-0pre5arch=armstamp=1106927269file=logas=raw yes, known. get the pr19162 patch from the gcc-snapshot package. Matthias --

Results for 3.3.5 (Debian 1:3.3.5-7) testsuite on hppa-linux

2005-01-31 Thread Matthias Klose
LAST_UPDATED: Thu Jan 27 21:23:18 UTC 2005 Native configuration is hppa-linux (sarti) === gpc tests === Running target any === gpc Summary === # of tests3910 # of expected passes 3905 # of unsupported tests5

Results for 3.3.5 (Debian 1:3.3.5-7) testsuite on i486-linux

2005-01-31 Thread Matthias Klose
LAST_UPDATED: Thu Jan 27 21:23:18 UTC 2005 Native configuration is i486-linux (cachaca) === gpc tests === Running target any === gpc Summary === # of tests3910 # of expected passes 3909 # of unsupported tests1

Results for 3.3.5 (Debian 1:3.3.5-7) testsuite on mips-linux

2005-01-31 Thread Matthias Klose
LAST_UPDATED: Thu Jan 27 21:23:18 UTC 2005 Native configuration is mips-linux (casals) === gpc tests === Running target any === gpc Summary === # of tests3910 # of expected passes 3905 # of unsupported tests5

Results for 3.3.5 (Debian 1:3.3.5-7) testsuite on mipsel-linux

2005-01-31 Thread Matthias Klose
LAST_UPDATED: Thu Jan 27 21:23:18 UTC 2005 Native configuration is mipsel-linux (remake) === gpc tests === Running target any === gpc Summary === # of tests3910 # of expected passes 3905 # of unsupported tests5

Results for 3.3.5 (Debian 1:3.3.5-8) testsuite on ia64-linux

2005-01-31 Thread Matthias Klose
LAST_UPDATED: Sun Jan 30 17:58:51 UTC 2005 Native configuration is ia64-linux (caballero) === gpc tests === Running target any FAIL: arctan.pas FAIL: fjf512.pas FAIL: fjf762a.pas FAIL: math.pas === gpc Summary === # of tests3910 # of expected

Results for 3.3.5 (Debian 1:3.3.5-8) testsuite on powerpc-linux

2005-01-31 Thread Matthias Klose
LAST_UPDATED: Sun Jan 30 17:58:51 UTC 2005 Native configuration is powerpc-linux (voltaire) === gpc tests === Running target any === gpc Summary === # of tests3910 # of expected passes 3905 # of unsupported tests5

Results for 3.3.5 (Debian 1:3.3.5-8) testsuite on mipsel-linux

2005-01-31 Thread Matthias Klose
LAST_UPDATED: Sun Jan 30 17:58:51 UTC 2005 Native configuration is mipsel-linux (remake) === gpc tests === Running target any === gpc Summary === # of tests3910 # of expected passes 3905 # of unsupported tests5

Results for 4.0.0 20050125 (experimental) (Debian 4.0-0pre5) testsuite on ia64-unknown-linux-gnu

2005-01-31 Thread Matthias Klose
LAST_UPDATED: Tue Jan 25 23:51:29 UTC 2005 Native configuration is ia64-unknown-linux-gnu === g++ tests === Running target unix FAIL: g++.dg/opt/longbranch1.C (test for excess errors) WARNING: g++.old-deja/g++.mike/p10769a.C compilation failed to produce executable XPASS:

Re: Franz Sirl's weak sym patch...

2001-03-15 Thread Matthias Klose
Christopher C. Chimelis writes: On Wed, 14 Mar 2001, Ben Collins wrote: I've added the patch from Franz to the 2.95 CVS. This is required for glibc to be buildable again. as I understand, this patch is applied upstream as well. Matthias, can you do a release of gcc-2.95 with

gcc-3.0 transition

2001-03-27 Thread Matthias Klose
Matt Taggart writes: IIRC gcc-3.0 is not a woody release goal. However it would be nice to get as many packages as possible gcc-3.0 clean. Those of us working on the hppa port will certainly be working on this. AFAIK, gcc-3.0 was a release goal. I didn't notice that is has been dropped.

gcc-defaults

2001-03-27 Thread Matthias Klose
Matt Taggart writes: Hi debian-gcc, If I understand it correctly the gcc-defaults package allows the different architectures to specify different default versions of the various compiler bits and it gets all the dependencies right. yes, that correct. the intention is to have only

Re: Installed gcc272 2.7.2.3-18 (i386 all source)

2001-04-01 Thread Matthias Klose
Richard A Nelson writes: Hrm, gcc272 is still the preferred compiler for 2.2.x series, is it not? It is, for i386 (and probably for m68k). It is automagically used by the kernel build script: Linux version 2.2.19pre18 ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) (gcc version 2.7.2.3) #7 Fri Mar 23 11:44:40

Re: gcc-3.0 snapshot...

2001-04-03 Thread Matthias Klose
Ben Collins writes: On Tue, Apr 03, 2001 at 01:10:30PM -0500, Gordon Sadler wrote: On Tue, Apr 03, 2001 at 12:43:16PM -0400, Ben Collins wrote: For the first time I was able to compile the gcc-3.0 CVS and build glibc 2.2.3pre1 with it on sparc-linux. Even more so, there were no errors

Re: building gcc cross compilers

2001-04-08 Thread Matthias Klose
Steve Langasek writes: On Fri, 30 Mar 2001, David Schleef wrote: On Fri, Mar 30, 2001 at 02:34:48PM -0600, Steve Langasek wrote: Any comment on the /usr/lib/gcc-lib/*/*/include files? I noticed that the gcc build process is supposed to be able to create float.h,

gcc-avr

2001-04-08 Thread Matthias Klose
Hakan Ardo writes: Hi, I have now succesfully produced an gcc-avr deb from the gcc-3.0_3.0.ds4-0pre010403 sources. To get it working I had to do some minor modifications, patches are attached. If you want it done in some other way just tell me an I'll fix it (if you don't prefer to do it

Bug#50559: easy enough to create a cross compiler package ;-?

2001-04-12 Thread Matthias Klose
Ben, it's easier now with the README.cross and the support in 2.95.4 ...

Bug#93786: arm-loop.dpatch

2001-04-12 Thread Matthias Klose
Philip Blundell writes: Package: gcc-2.95 Version: 1:2.95.3-11 This patch fixes a problem compiling binutils on ARM. It's already installed on the 2.95 branch in CVS, but if future packages are going to use the 2.95.3 tarball it would be good to have this included. just

Bug#90363: g77 report 90363

2001-04-13 Thread Matthias Klose
Philippe Troin writes: Matthias Klose [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: # workaround exists severity 90363 normal thanks please could you recheck with the g77-3.0 package from experimental? It does work with g77-3.0 AFAIR (not tested by myself, but reported to be working

Re: built packages based on Apr 15 snapshot

2001-04-18 Thread Matthias Klose
Ben Collins writes: On Mon, Apr 16, 2001 at 05:38:17PM -0600, Matt Taggart wrote: Hi debian-gcc, FYI... I built newer gcc-3.0 packages for hppa based on a cvs snapshot most recently synced up with upstream cvs on 2001-04-15. So basically I just replaced the

gcc-2.95

2001-04-18 Thread Matthias Klose
Jeff Bailey writes: The problem is the actual testsuite itself. In debian/rules2 line 311, they run awk against /proc/meminfo (obviously doesn't exist). Is there a way to determine the amount of free memory (including free swap)? Some test cases in the testsuite eat up all memory and can

Re: Binutils no longer autobuilding the cross-compiling packages...

2001-04-18 Thread Matthias Klose
Christopher C. Chimelis writes: On Tue, 17 Apr 2001, David Schleef wrote: Given how easy it is to build a debian package, I don't see much need for the maintainer to build N cross-compiling packages -- it also means that you're only likely to build the popular cross binutils,

Re: Kernel 2.2.19 and gcc 2.95.2

2001-04-23 Thread Matthias Klose
Simon Richter writes: On Wed, 18 Apr 2001, Richard Hirst wrote: The idea is to see whether m68k can live without gcc 2.7.2, since we seem to be the last platform depending on it and the maintainer wants to drop the package. Oh, sorry - I missed that point. Certainly I've

Bug#93708: gcc: man versus info inconsistency (-W and -Wall)

2001-04-23 Thread Matthias Klose
retitle 93708 [fixed in gcc-3.0] man versus info inconsistency (-W and -Wall) thanks Alexandre Duret-Lutz writes: Package: gcc Version: 1:2.95.3-7 Severity: normal Hi, The man page for gcc reads [...] -W Print extra warning messages for these events: [...]

Bug#94955: Linking with libstdc++ changes behavior of a program (which does not require libstdc++)

2001-04-23 Thread Matthias Klose
Ben Collins writes: On Sun, Apr 22, 2001 at 11:31:18PM -0700, Philippe Troin wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~% gcc -o foo foo.cpp -lstdc++ IMO, you should use: % g++ foo foo.cpp ...instead. There are a lot more things going on when using g++ other than adding -lstdc++. If this

upcoming bug squashing party

2001-04-25 Thread Matthias Klose
It would be nice if you could find people to look at gcc/g++ bugs found at http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/[EMAIL PROTECTED] which are - related to the alpha arch - C++ related. and send followups to the bug reports. Checking with gcc-2.95.4 and gcc-3.0 would be nice. Thanks, Matthias

Bug#95800: upgrade is broken

2001-04-30 Thread Matthias Klose
Brian May writes: Package: libstdc++2.10-dev Version: 1:2.95.2-13 Severity: grave Preparing to replace libstdc++2.10-dev 1:2.95.2-13 (using .../libstdc++2.10-dev_1%3a2.95.4-0.010424_i386.deb) ... perl: /lib/libc.so.6: version `GLIBC_2.2' not found (required by /lib/libdb.so.3)

getting gcc for hppa into the archive

2001-04-30 Thread Matthias Klose
Matt Taggart writes: At this point I think the toolchain has stablized enough that I'd like to get proper debs into the archive. All of our diffs have been accepted by upstream but on the 3.1 branch. IMHO the diffs are too large to just add to the current 3.0 package. So I see

Re: getting gcc for hppa into the archive

2001-04-30 Thread Matthias Klose
Matt Taggart writes: 2.) Do a general gcc-3.1 based on the upstream 3.1 branch. Teach gcc-defaults to use 3.1 for hppa. minor You're saying the gcc-defaults work is minor or the gcc-3.1 package? modifying the defaults work. Assuming that 3.0 stabilizes in the near future,

new gcc-2.95 packages

2001-05-02 Thread Matthias Klose
please could someone of you (Ben, Dan ?) build the gcc-2.95, which I checked in to the CVS? I still have to find out why the architecture string isn't correctly generated ... that's on an uptodate unstable system. dh_installdeb -a dh_gencontrol -a -u-v1:2.95.4-0.010502 dh_md5sums -a

Re: new gcc-2.95 packages

2001-05-03 Thread Matthias Klose
Ben Collins writes: Which version of dpkg-dev do you have installed? $ dpkg -l dpkg-dev Desired=Unknown/Install/Remove/Purge/Hold | Status=Not/Installed/Config-files/Unpacked/Failed-config/Half-installed |/ Err?=(none)/Hold/Reinst-required/X=both-problems (Status,Err: uppercase=bad) ||/ Name

Re: new gcc-2.95 packages

2001-05-04 Thread Matthias Klose
Ben Collins writes: On Thu, May 03, 2001 at 05:14:48PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote: Ben Collins writes: Which version of dpkg-dev do you have installed? $ dpkg -l dpkg-dev Desired=Unknown/Install/Remove/Purge/Hold | Status=Not/Installed/Config-files/Unpacked/Failed-config

Re: new gcc-2.95 packages

2001-05-04 Thread Matthias Klose
Ben Collins writes: On Fri, May 04, 2001 at 10:16:14AM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote: it's strange that calling dh_gencontrol directly, correctly generates the Architecture fields. Does dh_gencontrol / dpkg-gencontrol depend on some environment? Try setting DH_COMPAT and see

Bug#96436: gcc 2.95 package build stomps on dpkg-dev script variables

2001-05-06 Thread Matthias Klose
Daniel Jacobowitz writes: On Sat, May 05, 2001 at 02:50:35PM -0400, Gray Carper wrote: Package: gcc-2.95 Version: 2.95.4.ds1-0.010424 In truth, this applies to all gcc-2.95 versions. When building the gcc-2.95 package, four key dpkg-dev variables are utilized like this (in

removal of obsolete gcc packages

2001-05-24 Thread Matthias Klose
Package: ftp.debian.org Severity: important please remove the following gcc packages for all architecures in testing and unstable. The package names changed. libgcc300 libobjc300 libstdc3.0 libstdc3.0-dev libstdc3.0-dbg libgcj300 libgcj300-dev

Re: missing build-depends

2001-05-24 Thread Matthias Klose
Philip Blundell writes: I think you need to add libgc5-dev to the gcc build-depends. Without that package installed, the package build fails in objc. gcc-2.95_2.95.4.ds1-0.010506 has: Build-Depends: dejagnu (= 1.3-19990614), bzip2, binutils (= 2.11.90.0.1-1), deb helper (= 2),

Bug#97030: gcc: seems to generate incorrect code

2001-05-24 Thread Matthias Klose
severity 97030 normal retitle 97030 [fixed in gcc-3.0] wrong code generation thanks severity lowered: - works ok with -O1 - works ok with 3.0 Edmund GRIMLEY EVANS writes: I tried this with gcc-2_95-branch and gcc-3_0-branch from CVS today. The latest gcc-2.95 has the same problem, but the

Re: gcc question

2001-05-24 Thread Matthias Klose
Andrew 'ashridah' Pilley writes: which reminds me. when gcc 3.0 gets released, (which is supposed to be the 15th of june, surprisingly.) how will debian go about switching to it? (for x86 at least.) just changing the default compiler, and letting packages get upgraded as they go? or are

Bug#94404: priorities of gcc-3.0 packages

2001-05-26 Thread Matthias Klose
that get's difficult, because some architectures do use these libraries (and gcc-3.0) as the default. I am unsure if it's worth to reset these priorities, when migrating to 3.0.

new gcc packages

2001-05-26 Thread Matthias Klose
Uploaded a new gcc-3.0 package to incoming (2.95.4 and defaults as well). Checked that all the patches for the other archs still apply. If I get enough OK's from the other archs, I'd like to make the next upload priority high, such that it moves fast to testing and replaces the now incompatible

Log for failed build of gcc-2.95_2.95.4.ds2-0.010522

2001-05-28 Thread Matthias Klose
Ryan Murray writes: gcc 2.95 fails to build on mips: ok, debian/patches/gcc-mips-linux.dpatch didn't call autoconf. Please could you retry with the appended updated patch and autoconf2.13 (currently in incoming) installed? #! /bin/sh -e src=gcc if [ $# -eq 3 -a $2 = '-d' ]; then pdir=-d

Bug#99038: internal error using static synchronized

2001-05-30 Thread Matthias Klose
[bug submitted to the Debian BTS] compiler version is CVS 010526 from the 3.0 branch. // gcj-3.0 -c -O1 Bug.java // Bug.java: In class `Bug': // Bug.java: In method `Bug.get()': // Bug.java:3: Internal error: Segmentation fault class Bug { static synchronized Object get(int i) { return

Missed libgc5-dev in Build-Depends

2001-06-04 Thread Matthias Klose
Pavel Epifanov Y2 writes: I refer to gcc 2.95.2-13.1 package. It looks like that libobjc required some header files (gc.h,...) from libgc5-dev package in Potato. in gobjc-2.95.[34] gobjc recommends libgc5-dev.

Bug#100447: gcc-3.0-doc: Installation fails

2001-06-10 Thread Matthias Klose
Aaron Lehmann writes: Package: gcc-3.0-doc Version: 1:3.0-0pre010609 Severity: serious Setting up gcc-3.0-doc (3.0-0pre010609) ... sh: /usr/share/info/c-tree-300.info.gz: No such file or directory install-info: read gzip -d /usr/share/info/c-tree-300.info.gz |: 256 dpkg: error

gcc-3.0 update

2001-06-11 Thread Matthias Klose
Yesterday I uploaded new gcc-3.0 packages. Close before the gcc release I'd like to check the status of the Debian architecutres: alpha - 010526 arm - 010526, no java i386- 010609 hppa- 010427, no java, old ABI, Matt Taggert working on a new patch powerpc - 010609, no java (link

Re: gcc-3.0 update

2001-06-14 Thread Matthias Klose
On Mon, Jun 11, 2001 at 09:23:45AM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote: Yesterday I uploaded new gcc-3.0 packages. Close before the gcc release I'd like to check the status of the Debian architecutres: A new snapshot for fixing the installation bugs is in incoming. Next prerelease (or probably release

Re: gcc-3.0 update

2001-06-15 Thread Matthias Klose
severity 100696 normal retitle 100696 [m68k] official release won't work on m68k, bootstrap error thanks Roman Zippel writes: Hi, Matthias Klose wrote: m68k- status unknown, no build reports upstream (May, June) I will be very likely that the official release won't work

gcc-3.0 packages in incoming

2001-06-18 Thread Matthias Klose
here we go ... The packages are in incoming, built for i386, hppa patch checked, libgcc symlink corrected. known issues: - doxygen segfaults generating the libstdc++-v3 docs (1.3.6 worked ok). results in an empty html_user dir. - the subreg-byte patch applies, but misses the two texi files

Re: gcc-3.0 packages in incoming

2001-06-19 Thread Matthias Klose
Christopher C. Chimelis writes: Do we really need the doxygen part anyway? It's not compilable on Alpha unless we use gcc-3.0 anyway (and even then, it's untested...it's that bad C++ problem with 2.95.x that kept it from working from what I can tell). It's not needed for the binary-arch

Bug#100696: lowering severity of gcc-3.0 m68k bug

2001-06-19 Thread Matthias Klose
severity 100696 normal retitle 100696 [m68k] gcc-3.0 doesn't bootstrap on m68k-linux thanks Lowering the severity of this report. It's m68k only and m68k isn't yet supported by gcc-3.0. AFAIK the severity of the report would prohibit the migration of gcc-3.0 to testing. PS: I did send this to

Bug#101570: gcc-3.0_3.0.ds9-1(unstable):

2001-06-20 Thread Matthias Klose
Ryan Murray writes: Package: gcc-3.0 Version: 3.0.ds9-1 Severity: serious There was an error while trying to autobuild your package: Automatic build of gcc-3.0_3.0.ds9-1 on resume.rfc822.org by sbuild/mips 1.158 Build started at 20010620-0013 [...] configure:

Bug#101637: Cannot resume after failure in binary-libstdcxx.mk

2001-06-20 Thread Matthias Klose
Jeff Bailey writes: Package: gcc-3.0 Version: 3.0.ds8-0pre010613 While porting to the Hurd, I came across a bug in binary-libstdcxx.mk. I corrected the bug and reran `debian/rules binary-arch'. However, because it had *already* moved some files around, it's not capable of resuming

Bug#101731: marked as done (GCC series of packages should properly use the Debian alternatives system)

2001-06-21 Thread Matthias Klose
No, it should not. Read /usr/share/doc/gcc/README.Debian: gcc-defaults for Debian --- Provide the architecture specific defaults for the compilers of the GNU compiler collection (gcc). The default compiler versions for Debian GNU/Linux on i386 are (minor

new gcc for potato?

2001-06-23 Thread Matthias Klose
Philip Blundell writes: I think our current gcc 2.95.4 is stable enough, and sufficiently better than the 2.95.2 in potato, that we should consider making new packages to go into 2.2r4 or whatever the next version is going to be. I guess this should be straightforward enough to achieve.

Bug#101901: g++-3.0 and --use-cxa-atexit

2001-06-23 Thread Matthias Klose
Chris, any support in ld needed? laurent bonnaud writes: Package: g++-3.0 Version: 1:3.0-1 Severity: normal Hi, according to http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.html#known, it would seem to be a good idea to compile g++-3.0 with the --use-cxa-atexit switch: Global destructors are

Bug#101901: g++-3.0 and --use-cxa-atexit

2001-06-23 Thread Matthias Klose
Daniel Jacobowitz writes: On Sat, Jun 23, 2001 at 02:47:51PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote: Chris, any support in ld needed? laurent bonnaud writes: Package: g++-3.0 Version: 1:3.0-1 Severity: normal Hi, according to http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.html

gcc 3.0 stdio,h

2001-06-24 Thread Matthias Klose
strange. unable to reproduce. could you send the preprocessed input and run it with -H please? rb writes: I've installed gcc-3.0 This code: #include stdio.h int main () { return 0; } gives syntax error to me. Attached there is a little more. Can you say anything. My solution

Bug#101795: dist-upgrade fails: perl: /lib/libc.so.6: version `GLIBC_2.2' not found (required by /lib/libdb.so.3)

2001-06-24 Thread Matthias Klose
reassign 101795 perl thanks the error occurs when perl runs during the install process. at least that I deduce from the error log.

Bug#102193: gcc-3.0: compiled code with gcc 3.0 is slow and big :-(

2001-06-25 Thread Matthias Klose
funny report. what do you expect? please provide the relevant source as documented in /usr/share/doc/gcc-3.0/README.Bugs.gz. Gabor Lenart writes: Package: gcc-3.0 Version: 1:3.0-2 Severity: wishlist Hi! I'm Gabor Lenart from Hungary and we're developing a movie player software

Bug#101876: gcc-defaults for hppa broken

2001-06-28 Thread Matthias Klose
Matt Taggart writes: When you made this change you accidentally changed hppa instead of ia64. So hppa should be 3.0 and ia64 should be 2.96. I'm sorry. Fixed in 0.11 (currently in incoming).

function attributes should apply to function pointers too

2001-06-29 Thread Matthias Klose
Submitter-Id: net Originator:Richard Kettlewell [EMAIL PROTECTED] Organization: The Debian project Confidential: no Synopsis: function attributes should apply to function pointers too Severity: non-critical Priority: low Category: c Class: change-request

unrecognized token before #include points to wrong source

2001-06-30 Thread Matthias Klose
Submitter-Id: net Originator:Jim Bray [EMAIL PROTECTED] Organization: The Debian project Confidential: no Synopsis: unrecognized token before #include points to wrong source Severity: non-critical Priority: low Category: preprocessor Class: sw-bug Release:

request for a customer id

2001-06-30 Thread Matthias Klose
Submitter-Id: net Originator:Matthias Klose Organization: Confidential: no Synopsis: Severity: Priority: Category: send-pr Class: Release: 3.0 (Debian) (Debian testing/unstable) Environment: System: Linux gate.local 2.4.4-ac15 #1 Fri May 25 00:52:55 MEST

internal error using static synchronized

2001-06-30 Thread Matthias Klose
Submitter-Id: net Originator:Patrik Hagglund [EMAIL PROTECTED] Organization: The Debian project Confidential: no Synopsis: internal error using static synchronized Severity: serious Priority: medium Category: java Class: ice-on-legal-code Release: 3.0

-fno-bounds-check in combination with -W gives strange message

2001-06-30 Thread Matthias Klose
Submitter-Id: net Originator:Patrik Hagglund [EMAIL PROTECTED] Organization: The Debian project Confidential: no Synopsis: -fno-bounds-check in combination with -W gives strange message Severity: non-critical Priority: low Category: java Class: sw-bug Release:

Bug#100722: redundant error message from cpp

2001-06-30 Thread Matthias Klose
Cesar Eduardo Barros writes: that: - what's :29:36: and :61:62: ? Why two numbers? line and column number

Bug#102473: include_next does not work correctly in std_cstdio.h (and others)

2001-06-30 Thread Matthias Klose
Christof Petig writes: Package: libstdc++3-dev Version: 3.0-2 Platform: ppc If I compile a program which includes any of the following headers: cassert, cctype, cerrno, clocale (and others) I get the following errors: /usr/include/g++-v3/bits/std_cstring.h:40:25: string.h: No such

Internal compiler error (with wrong code, though)

2001-06-30 Thread Matthias Klose
Submitter-Id: net Originator:Michael Piefel [EMAIL PROTECTED] Organization: The Debian project Confidential: no Synopsis: Internal compiler error (with wrong code, though) Severity: non-critical Priority: low Category: c++ Class: ice-on-illegal-code Release:

gcc-3_0 march=athlon (-Os || -ggdb)

2001-07-01 Thread Matthias Klose
sorry for the late response. Gordon Sadler writes: I understand the athon code is new (and mostly/somewhat untested?). I also understand the kernel itself is having problems with 2.4.x and athlon code WRT some VIA chipsets (I have one and innumerable oopses sent to lkml). All of my

weird behaviour when incrementing volatile ints

2001-07-01 Thread Matthias Klose
Submitter-Id: net Originator:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Organization: The Debian project Confidential: no Synopsis: weird behaviour when incrementing volatile ints Severity: non-critical Priority: low Category: target Class: pessimizes-code Release: 3.0 (Debian

appalling optimisation with sub/cmp on i386

2001-07-01 Thread Matthias Klose
Submitter-Id: net Originator:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Organization: The Debian project Confidential: no Synopsis: appalling optimisation with sub/cmp on i386 Severity: non-critical Priority: low Category: optimization Class: pessimizes-code Release: 3.0 (Debian

builtin memcmp() could be optimised

2001-07-01 Thread Matthias Klose
Submitter-Id: net Originator:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Organization: The Debian project Confidential: no Synopsis: builtin memcmp() could be optimised Severity: non-critical Priority: low Category: optimization Class: sw-bug Release: 3.0 (Debian GNU/Linux) and

Inlined strlen() could be smarter

2001-07-01 Thread Matthias Klose
Submitter-Id: net Originator:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Organization: The Debian project Confidential: no Synopsis: Inlined strlen() could be smarter Severity: non-critical Priority: low Category: optimization Class: sw-bug Release: 3.0 (Debian GNU/Linux) and

Re: the Drepper thread

2001-07-01 Thread Matthias Klose
Ben Collins writes: On Sun, Jul 01, 2001 at 12:09:11PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote: I see that we do not have the patch http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2001-06/msg00748.html applied in the Debian packages. The other patch mentioned comes from the branch. I thought we had

Re: GCC vs GLIBC: why this stance, Drepper ?!?

2001-07-01 Thread Matthias Klose
On Sun, 1 Jul 2001 12:02:18 +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote: On Sat, Jun 30, 2001 at 03:41:28PM -0700, Justin Guyett wrote: rh gcc 2.96 snapshot. Does the 2.95.4 snapshot used by debian have those two patches in it? I believe they have the atexit patch, it is in CVS after all. Dunno about the

Should we keep libstdc++2.8?

2001-07-03 Thread Matthias Klose
Martin Michlmayr writes: Is there a good reason to keep libstdc++2.8? It has not made the FHS transition, is out of date, and no package depends on it. Can it be removed? AFAICR some netscape package depended on it (or plugins for netscape). Newer netscape packages don't depend on it

error in auto_ptr implementation

2001-07-03 Thread Matthias Klose
Submitter-Id: net Originator:Wichert Akkerman [EMAIL PROTECTED] Organization: The Debian project Confidential: no Synopsis: error in auto_ptr implementation Severity: serious Priority: medium Category: libstdc++ Class: rejects-legal Release: 3.0 (Debian

missing hash function for std::string

2001-07-03 Thread Matthias Klose
Submitter-Id: net Originator:Goswin Brederlow [EMAIL PROTECTED] Organization: The Debian project Confidential: no Synopsis: missing hash function for std::string Severity: serious Priority: medium Category: libstdc++ Class: rejects-legal Release: 3.0

Bug#101223: Undefined reference to 'cout'

2001-07-03 Thread Matthias Klose
Gordon Sadler writes: Note below the order of the -L args. /usr/lib/gcc-lib/i386-linux/2.95.4 comes last... Shouldn't it be first? Maybe a change to the specs? It so happens I have gcc-3 and libstdc++-v3 installed in /usr/local, so I can compile this on a few ways: Ok, then gcc-2.95 picks

Bug#103568: gcc-3.0_3.0.ds9-4(unstable): fails to build from source

2001-07-05 Thread Matthias Klose
James Troup writes: Package: gcc-3.0 Version: 3.0.ds9-4 Severity: serious Help? please disable java for sparc in debian/rules.conf. [ if you have time, it would be interesting to install the just built libgcc1 package and then try again to build java/libgcj ] sorry, no sparc

powerpc nof package could use reviving in 3.0

2001-07-08 Thread Matthias Klose
Daniel Jacobowitz writes: ... or we need to come up with a more standard way of dealing with GCC multilibs, or decide to turn them off. Right now the soft-float (nof) libstdc++ is in the main gcc package! Phil disabled the softfloat package for arm, m68k doesn't build (yet), the other

g++-3.0 copies constructors

2001-07-16 Thread Matthias Klose
Submitter-Id: net Originator:Jaakko Niemi [EMAIL PROTECTED] Organization: The Debian project Confidential: no Synopsis: g++-3.0 copies constructors Severity: serious Priority: medium Category: c++ Class: sw-bug Release: 3.0 (Debian GNU/Linux)

Bug#103980: Severities

2001-07-17 Thread Matthias Klose
severity 98614 serious thanks Anthony Towns writes: severity 103980 serious thanks # severity important is enough to be release critical, but it does not # hinder the update system to replace the gcc-3.0 prerelease in # testing with the final release. important isn't release

Bug#105695: gcc-defaults: please remove suggestions of task packages

2001-07-21 Thread Matthias Klose
Colin Watson writes: Package: gcc-defaults Version: 0.11 Severity: normal Hi, gcc, gobjc, and g++ all suggest task-* packages, which no longer exist in testing/unstable. Perhaps they could be replaced by suggestions of some useful individual packages instead. but which

G++ 3.0

2001-07-23 Thread Matthias Klose
Alexei Khlebnikov writes: I am faced with a problem: my classes hierarchy is not compiled by G++ 3.0 Debian prerelease. I use woody branch and I don't want to switch to sid because I want to have a somewhat stable system. G++ 3.0 Debian prerelease ICEs on my (legal) code. I've wrote a

Re: G++ 3.0

2001-07-23 Thread Matthias Klose
Christopher C. Chimelis writes: On Mon, 23 Jul 2001, Matthias Klose wrote: I don't like the current situation. we have a gcc version in woody that should be removed and version in sid, which doesn't propagate. What's the hold-up on the sid-woody move for gcc-3.0 (I haven't

Re: G++ 3.0

2001-07-24 Thread Matthias Klose
Anthony Towns writes: On Mon, Jul 23, 2001 at 09:32:26PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote: Christopher C. Chimelis writes: On Mon, 23 Jul 2001, Matthias Klose wrote: I don't like the current situation. we have a gcc version in woody that should be removed and version in sid, which

Please do another gcc-3.0 upload (was: Re: katie change: source versions must be newer than existing versions)

2001-07-28 Thread Matthias Klose
James Troup writes: James Troup [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: This had to be done since jenna does removals based on version numbers and if someone (say, doko@ ;-) uploaded a source package with an older version than previously existed, it would be auto-deleted in favour of the

Bug#107012: gcc-3.0_1:3.0.1ds0-0pre010727(unstable): fails to build from source

2001-07-29 Thread Matthias Klose
Ryan Murray writes: Package: gcc-3.0 Version: 1:3.0.1ds0-0pre010727 Severity: serious There was an error while trying to autobuild your package: Automatic build of gcc-3.0_1:3.0.1ds0-0pre010727 on resume.rfc822.org by sbuild/mips 1.159 Build started at 20010729-0319 The

gcc-3.0.1-0pre010731 in incoming

2001-07-31 Thread Matthias Klose
Currently uploading new gcc-3.0 packages. Still hoping that this will become a candidate for testing. Currently building on sparc. For testing we will need at least alpha and hppa packages? The source package is on vore as well.

Bug#107569: gcc-3.0-sparc64_3.0.1-0pre010801_sparc fail apt-get install

2001-08-03 Thread Matthias Klose
I'm unable to test this on sparc (Ben?). Anyway: - which packages and versions are installed before? (gcc-3.0, gcc-3.0-sparc64, gcc-3.0-base) - does removing the old packages (gcc-3.0, gcc-3.0-sparc64) work around the problem? [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Package: gcc-3.0-sparc64 Version:

Bug#107610: cc1: /tmp/ccoDern9.i: Invalid argument

2001-08-04 Thread Matthias Klose
Sven writes: Package: gcc Version: Version: 2:2.95.4-5 Hello, ... i just finished a new unstable install, and got the following error as i wanted to build a package : [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/debian/ocaml/ocaml-3.02$ gcc -o /tmp/gcc /tmp/gcc.c cc1: /tmp/ccoDern9.i: Invalid

Bug#107633: Error in std library headers

2001-08-04 Thread Matthias Klose
- could you run this with -v? - which architecture? Christopher Currie writes: Package: libstdc++3-dev Version: 1:3.0.1-0pre010801 I cannot compile a trivial C++ program because of errors in the standard library headers. Example program: test.cc #include iostream int

g++

2001-08-04 Thread Matthias Klose
Submitter-Id: net Originator:Ove Kaaven [EMAIL PROTECTED] Organization: The Debian project Confidential: no Synopsis: g++ Severity: serious Priority: low Category: c++ Class: wrong-code Release: 3.0.1 (CVS 20010801) (Debian GNU/Linux) Environment: System:

gcc-3.0 1:3.0.1ds1-0pre010801 not compiling on hppa

2001-08-05 Thread Matthias Klose
Santiago Garcia Mantinan writes: Hi! I have been following the compiling of the new version of gcc-3.0 on the autobuilder for hppa (/home/buildd/logs/gcc-3.0_1:3.0.1ds0-0pre010727_20010729-2217 on paer) and the problem seems to be that libgc is not available for hppa, so the build

  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >