Package: eglibc
Version: 2.10.2-5
Severity: serious
The following tests fail:
Test results, compared with installed binutils:
W: [ld-elfvsb/elfvsb.exp] REGRESSION (PASS - FAIL): visibility (normal) (non
PIC, load offset)
W: [ld-elfvsb/elfvsb.exp] REGRESSION (PASS - FAIL): visibility (normal)
Package: eglibc
Version: 2.11.1-1
Severity: serious
see
https://buildd.debian.org/fetch.cgi?pkg=gcc-snapshot;ver=20100530-1;arch=kfreebsd-amd64;stamp=1275239549
gnatgcc -c -g -DIN_GCC -W -Wall -Wwrite-strings -Wcast-qual -Wstrict-prototypes
-Wmissing-prototypes -Wold-style-definition
Package: eglibc
Version: 2.11.1-2
Severity: serious
gcc-4.4 and gcc-4.5 fail to build after the upgrade to eglibc-2.11:
https://buildd.debian.org/fetch.cgi?pkg=gcc-4.4;ver=4.4.4-4;arch=mips;stamp=1275677666
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-glibc-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of
On 06.06.2010 00:51, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
On Sat, Jun 05, 2010 at 03:50:51AM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
Package: eGLIBC
Version: 2.11.1-2
Severity: serious
gcc-4.4 and gcc-4.5 fail to build after the upgrade to eGLIBC-2.11:
https://buildd.debian.org/fetch.cgi?pkg=gcc-4.4;ver=4.4.4-4;arch
On 12.06.2010 15:19, André Wöbbeking wrote:
I can confirm this also for C++ programs. It's an interaction of eglibc 2.11 and
gold. eglibc 2.10 and gold work together and eglibc 2.11 without gold also
works.
no, it's not 2.11, but 2.11 glibc built --with-multi-arch. Would the glibc
On 12.06.2010 19:00, André Wöbbeking wrote:
On Saturday 12 June 2010, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
Moreover we can also backport the optimized functions that have been
added in 2.12, but the current goal is to move 2.11 to squeeze, so it
will be for later.
All that said, I don't plan to disable
Package: libc6
Version: 2.11.2-2
Severity: grave
This change breaks OpenJDK on armel:
* Add patches/any/cvs-flush-cache-textrels.diff to fix random crashes
on ARM, if the executable or shared library has TEXTREL.
Reverting this change unbreaks openjdk.
$ java -version -zero
Segmentation
On 01.09.2010 11:35, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 06:05:15AM +0200, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
On Sun, Aug 29, 2010 at 07:30:10PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
Package: libc6
Version: 2.11.2-2
Severity: grave
This change breaks OpenJDK on armel:
* Add patches/any/cvs-flush
Package: eglibc
Version: 2.13-10
Severity: normal
Tags: patch
User: ubuntu-de...@lists.ubuntu.com
Usertags: origin-ubuntu oneiric ubuntu-patch
this is for a pending change for the multiarch updates in GCC. On multilib
enabled archs the include and library directories are looked up using a prefix
probably related to #427398.
Gerrit Pape writes:
Package: gcc-4.1
Version: 4.1.2-11
See
http://buildd.debian.org/fetch.cgi?pkg=git-corever=1%3A1.5.2.1-1arch=hppastamp=1180881720file=log
I can reproduce this in paer's sid chroot as follows:
$ apt-get source git-core
Reading package
Package: libc6-ppc64
Version: 2.6-3
Severity: serious
Seen while rebuilding gcc-4.2 / gcj-4.2; 64bit configure tests fail
with a segfault. Reverting to 2.6-2 lets the bootstrap succeed.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL
Aurelien Jarno writes:
clone 434626 -1
reassign -1 gcc-4.2
retitle -1 [powerpc] generate broken 64-bit binaries
thanks
On Wed, Jul 25, 2007 at 01:18:43PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
Package: libc6-ppc64
Version: 2.6-3
Severity: serious
Seen while rebuilding gcc-4.2 / gcj-4.2
Glibc upstream announced recently that the glibc 2.7 will be tagged
and released very soon (probably on Oct 17[0]).
which toolchain versions are required as build dependencies?
Matthias
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL
Package: glibc
Version: 2.7-10
http://experimental.ftbfs.de/fetch.php?pkg=binutilsver=2.18.50.20080507-1arch=alphastamp=1210319481file=logas=raw
In file included from ../../bfd/trad-core.c:45:
/usr/include/sys/user.h:27:22: error: asm/page.h: No such file or directory
make[5]: *** [trad-core.lo]
Package: glibc
Version: 2.7-11
Severity: important
Please build libc6-hppa64 and libc6-hppa64-dev packages; there is no
package build-depending on libc6-hppa64-dev, but we need these
packages to run the testsuites for binutils and gcc-4.X. Currently
these packages are completely untested,
clone 482902 -1
reassign -1 general
severity -1 serious
thanks
Aurelien Jarno writes:
severity 482902 wishlist
tag 482902 + upstream
tag 482902 + wontfix
thanks
Matthias Klose a écrit :
Package: glibc
Version: 2.7-11
Severity: important
Please build libc6-hppa64 and libc6-hppa64
Package: tzdata
Version: 2008c-1
Please generate zoneinfo files in the file format known by
openjdk/sun-java; this should be built from the tzdata source to avoid
duplication of the data and put into a separate binary package.
please use either use the sources included in the ubuntu patch
Package: glibc
Tags: patch
updated compare.sh sorting both files before comparing.
Matthias
#!/bin/bash
if [ $# -ne '2' ]; then
echo -e \nUsage: Compare a test-expected-* file and a test-results-* file.
echo -e $0 : Expected testsuite results Testsuite results \n;
exit 1
fi;
Package: tzdata
Version: 2009e-1
tzdata doesn't include timezones from the pacificnew file, please include these.
some testcase complain about the missing zones.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-glibc-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact
Package: libc6-i386
Severity: serious
the current conflict (= 4.4.0-5) is not enough. it has to be 4.4.0-7.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-glibc-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Package: libc6-i386
Version: 2.9-16
Severity: serious
conficts with libc6-dev-i386 (= 2.9.14), which should be 2.9-14.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-glibc-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Goswin von Brederlow schrieb:
Hi,
small update to the bug report.
The libc6-i386 package screwed up the transition by forgetting to
delete the /lib32 and /usr/lib32 in preinst. So on upgrades all files
remain under /emul/ia32-linux/ and the only thing that changes is the
way dpkg sees
Package: libc6
Version: 2.10.1-0exp1
Severity: important
E.g. apt-get's call to getaddrinfo() returns with EAI_SYSTEM when /etc/hosts is
missing and EAI_NONAME if /etc/hosts is empty. This is different from 2.9, where
EAI_NONAME is returned in both cases, resulting in the regression in
On 08.11.2009 20:47, Carlos O'Donell wrote:
On Sun, Nov 8, 2009 at 1:42 PM, Carlos O'Donellcar...@systemhalted.org wrote:
Always the same crash for all the failures I've looked at. Hopefully
this is something trivial that was missed.
The current libc is missing my patches to fix
Package: eglibc
Vesion: 2.10.1-7
Severity: grave
seen on i386, most of the g++/libstdc++ tests are failing. seen with current
gcc-4.4 package and with the packaging in the gcc svn.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-glibc-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble?
On 18.11.2009 14:54, Peter Fritzsche wrote:
forwarded 556951 http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10982
thanks
Matthias Klose wrote:
[]
`debian/sauerbraten-dbg/usr/lib/debug//usr/lib/games/sauerbraten/sauer_cl
ient': Invalid operation dh_strip: objcopy returned exit code 1
On 18.11.2009 21:43, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 07:58:47PM -0600, Matthias Klose wrote:
I only see this when upgrading to current glibc in unstable; not with testing.
Could you be more precise with the versions? glibc in testing and
unstable have the same version.
sorry
[should we drop parisc-linux?]
John David Anglin writes:
Er, no; we're talking about official Debian packages here, and the
libstdc++.so.6 in Debian is now from gcc-4.1. The problem is precisely that
GMP *is* being built using gcc-4.0, but libstdc++ is from gcc-4.1, resulting
in the
Is this a leftover, which can be changed to gcc-4.1 now?
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Package: glibc
Version: 2.5-0exp1
Tags: experimental
Severity: serious
see #374535, it's the GNU_TYPE, not the Debian architecture.
$ find /usr/include/ -name stubs*/usr/include/gnu/stubs.h
/usr/include/gnu/stubs-32.h
/usr/include/ppc64-linux-gnu/gnu/stubs.h
Package: glibc
Version: 2.5
Tags: experimental
Severity: important
glibc uses --hash-style for linking, when detected. Please
build-depend on the appropriate binutils version, so that glibc is
always built using --hash-style=both.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of
Package: glibc
Version: 2.5
Severity: important
libssp32, libssp64 are not built anymore by gcc in experimental, glibc
b-d on these.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Aurelien Jarno writes:
Matthias Klose a écrit :
Package: glibc
Version: 2.5
Severity: important
libssp32, libssp64 are not built anymore by gcc in experimental, glibc
b-d on these.
This means we will have to build-depends on gcc-4.1 from experimental.
or maybe provide libssp32
reopen 405738
found 405738 2.5-1
apparently the build dependency has been dropped again; was there a
reason to rush the glibc upload and not to wait for the binutils
update?
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Package: libc6-dev
Version: 2.13-15
Severity: serious
$ dpkg -c libc6-dev_2.13-15_i386.deb | grep fpu_control
-rw-r--r-- root/root 3163 2011-08-08 20:21 ./usr/include/fpu_control.h
-rw-r--r-- root/root 3291 2011-08-08 20:10
./usr/include/i386-linux-gnu/fpu_control.h
--
To
Package: eglibc
Version: 2.13-24
Severity: important
User: debian-...@lists.debian.org
Usertags: non-standard-compiler, gcc-4.4
This package builds with a non standard compiler version; please check
if this package can be built with the default version of gcc/g++, or
with gcc-4.6/g++-4.6.
Please
Package: eglibc
Please backport ARM makecontext() routines from trunk, or
https://code.launchpad.net/~michaelh1/ubuntu/precise/eglibc/lp696794/+merge/96465
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-glibc-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact
Package: src:eglibc
Version: 2.17-2
Severity: serious
seen when trying to build gcc-4.8:
In file included from /usr/include/features.h:395:0,
from /usr/include/stdio.h:27,
from ../../../../src/libgcc/../gcc/tsystem.h:87,
from
reassign 148664 glibc
thanks
Sean Perry writes:
Package: g++-3.1
Version: 1:3.1-2
Severity: normal
in modern C++ the style is:
#include cassert
std::assert(this_should_be_true);
however this fails to compile under 3.1 claiming:
parse error before `static_cast'
my code is not
another improvement would be to read the used libgcc_s.so from the
command line, use binutils-multiarch and run it nice'd on ftp-master
or a mirror for all architectures ...
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Yann Dirson writes:
I have several packages (e2fsprogs, bigloo) that fail to build on
m68k, apparently due to one or more gcc bug(s). Maybe that's the same
as #146006, and #89023, but I can't tell that myself.
Madkiss suggested forcing the use of gcc-3.2. But if this compiler is
Jack Howarth writes:
Hi,
I am not filing a bug on this right now, but you should
all be aware that any arch that wants to switch to gcc 3.2
as its default compiler will need to address the following
issue. The libgcc symbols starting in gcc 3.1 are now .hidden
which means breakage of old
Jack Howarth writes:
Now that glibc 2.3.1 is in sid, what are the plans
for the transition to gcc 3.2.1?
we are waiting for an transition plan. My assumption was Jeff would
propose a transition plan for a _coordinated_ transition of glibc and
gcc. It seems a bit late for that :-(
I am
Debian Installer writes:
(new) libg++2.8.1.3-glibc2.3_2.95.4-13_i386.deb optional libs
(new) libstdc++2.10-glibc2.3_2.95.4-13_i386.deb required base
didn't see these when uploading. Do we really need new packages?
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe.
---BeginMessage---
Matthias Klose [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
ok, I'm forwarding this to Martin and Phil, two upstream developers
(hopefully still ;-) listening on debian-gcc.
I would suggest that the libstdc++ autoconf test should be enhanced:
_GLIBCPP_HAVE_ACOSL should not be defined
Package: glibc
Version: 2.3.1
Severity: serious
Looking at http://buildd.debian.org/build.php?arch=m68kpkg=gcc-3.2
you'll see that beginning with
build 1:3.2.1ds5-0pre6 (latest build at Nov 14 04:53: successful)
nearly all tests of the gcc testsuite begin to fail. This is the first
build with
Junichi Uekawa writes:
To ensure some locales are available, I think you can use LOCPATH,
and create locales locally, so that the following are available:
de_DE ISO-8859-1
en_US ISO-8859-1
fr_FR ISO-8859-1
see /usr/sbin/locale-gen on how to generate these locale
Would it be possible to depend on the locales version, which was part
of the previous package as well?
For the moment it's not possible to install -14 until glibc -14 has
been built for these architecture. What is wrong having locales -14
and libc6 -13 installed on the system?
Matthias
Package: libc6-dev
Version: 2.3.1
Severity: grave
Attached is a diff of a binutils built in unstable with gcc-2.95 and
one built on yesterday's testing (still glibc-2.2.5). Although I
cannot prove that other build depedencies of binutils are the cause of
this failures, I start with glibc as the
GOTO Masanori writes:
At Sun, 9 Mar 2003 08:26:52 +0100,
Matthias Klose wrote:
Package: libc6-dev
Version: 2.3.1
Severity: grave
Attached is a diff of a binutils built in unstable with gcc-2.95 and
one built on yesterday's testing (still glibc-2.2.5).
Is this diff means
Daniel Jacobowitz writes:
On Sun, Mar 09, 2003 at 09:24:50AM +0100, Matthias Klose wrote:
GOTO Masanori writes:
At Sun, 9 Mar 2003 08:26:52 +0100,
Matthias Klose wrote:
Package: libc6-dev
Version: 2.3.1
Severity: grave
Attached is a diff of a binutils built
James Troup writes:
Clint Adams [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
-MYCC = gcc-3.2 -m64
+MYCC = gcc-3.3 -m64
Don't forget a build-depends on gcc-3.3 if you do this...
I would like to wait with the next upload until the current 3.2
packages move to testing, if this happens this week. Just
James Troup writes:
GOTO Masanori [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Matthias, could you tell me that --enable-sjlj-exception is really
needed for some archs?
arm still uses sjlj based exceptions in 3.3, so there is at least one
arch which does not have a choice.
Yes, it's needed. If we don't use
Jeff Bailey writes:
That's why I sent you the message asking you about the binutils release
from today.
see http://ftp-master.debian.org/~doko/binutils/
but the installation fails. not yet sure why ...
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble?
[CCing m68k, if the new results look acceptable]
GOTO Masanori writes:
Hi Matthias,
At Sun, 9 Mar 2003 08:26:52 +0100,
Matthias Klose wrote:
Package: libc6-dev
Version: 2.3.1
Severity: grave
Attached is a diff of a binutils built in unstable with gcc-2.95 and
one built
GOTO Masanori writes:
At Sat, 9 Aug 2003 14:49:27 +0200,
Matthias Klose wrote:
Please decouple this tight dependency. It breaks at least building
all packages which run a testsuite with locale dependent tests.
Well, however, I've recognized this is problem. One idea is Depends:
libc6
Package: locales
Version: 2.3.2-2
Severity: important, maybe serious
At least in the changelog I don't see an entry that the dependency on
glibc-2.3.2-2 with the same Debian release number is actually needed.
Please decouple this tight dependency. It breaks at least building all
packages which
[CC to Andreas]
GOTO Masanori writes:
At Thu, 7 Aug 2003 08:08:24 +0200,
Matthias Klose wrote:
[CCing m68k, if the new results look acceptable]
GOTO Masanori writes:
Hi Matthias,
At Sun, 9 Mar 2003 08:26:52 +0100,
Matthias Klose wrote:
Package: libc6-dev
Version
Jack Howarth writes:
Hi,
I am not filing a bug on this right now, but you should
all be aware that any arch that wants to switch to gcc 3.2
as its default compiler will need to address the following
issue. The libgcc symbols starting in gcc 3.1 are now .hidden
which means breakage of old
Jack Howarth writes:
Now that glibc 2.3.1 is in sid, what are the plans
for the transition to gcc 3.2.1?
we are waiting for an transition plan. My assumption was Jeff would
propose a transition plan for a _coordinated_ transition of glibc and
gcc. It seems a bit late for that :-(
I am
Yann Dirson writes:
I have several packages (e2fsprogs, bigloo) that fail to build on
m68k, apparently due to one or more gcc bug(s). Maybe that's the same
as #146006, and #89023, but I can't tell that myself.
Madkiss suggested forcing the use of gcc-3.2. But if this compiler is
---BeginMessage---
Package: g77-2.95
Version: 1:2.95.4-12
Severity: normal
I have a multi-language application. It used to compile fine. Now, it
has an undefined reference when linking.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]/hello/runF77]g77 -g -O2 -o runF772C
helloclient.o ./.libs/libClient.a
reassign 171778 libc6
thanks
I cannot find the report on http://bugs.debian.org/src:glibc
http://bugs.debian.org/171778 lists the maintainer as
unknown. Reassigning the report so you get aware of it ;-)
This currently breaks bootstrap of gcc-3.2 on sparc. See
Richard Zidlicky writes:
On Tue, Oct 29, 2002 at 06:10:57PM +0100, Yann Dirson wrote:
On Mon, Oct 21, 2002 at 09:43:05PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
Yann Dirson writes:
I have several packages (e2fsprogs, bigloo) that fail to build on
m68k, apparently due to one or more gcc bug(s
Package: glibc
Version: 2.3.1
Severity: serious
Looking at http://buildd.debian.org/build.php?arch=m68kpkg=gcc-3.2
you'll see that beginning with
build 1:3.2.1ds5-0pre6 (latest build at Nov 14 04:53: successful)
nearly all tests of the gcc testsuite begin to fail. This is the first
build with
James Troup writes:
Clint Adams [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
-MYCC = gcc-3.2 -m64
+MYCC = gcc-3.3 -m64
Don't forget a build-depends on gcc-3.3 if you do this...
I would like to wait with the next upload until the current 3.2
packages move to testing, if this happens this week. Just
You can find packages of binutils-2.14.90.0.1 for alpha, arm, hppa,
ia64, i386, m68k, powerpc, sparc and s390 on
http://ftp-master.debian.org/~doko/binutils/
These packages fix at least some important reports. In the same
directory there is a README.test-summaries, which compares the
Goto,
please wait two days, until
- gcc-3.3 moves to testing (uploaded for mipsel, currently building
for mips)
- gcc-defaults is uploaded to make gcc to point to gcc-3.3
- binutils-2.14.90.0.1 is uploaded (and we can enable gcc-3.3 and
glibc for x86-64)
I don't know if we should wait for
James Troup writes:
GOTO Masanori [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Matthias, could you tell me that --enable-sjlj-exception is really
needed for some archs?
arm still uses sjlj based exceptions in 3.3, so there is at least one
arch which does not have a choice.
Yes, it's needed. If we don't use
what's happening there? an unreleased version on a buildd? this breaks
all packages build-depending on locales.
Matthias
Jeff Bailey writes:
That's why I sent you the message asking you about the binutils release
from today.
see http://ftp-master.debian.org/~doko/binutils/
but the installation fails. not yet sure why ...
[CCing m68k, if the new results look acceptable]
GOTO Masanori writes:
Hi Matthias,
At Sun, 9 Mar 2003 08:26:52 +0100,
Matthias Klose wrote:
Package: libc6-dev
Version: 2.3.1
Severity: grave
Attached is a diff of a binutils built in unstable with gcc-2.95 and
one built
reassign 214692 g++-3.3
reassign 214694 g++-3.3
severity 214692 normal
severity 214694 normal
merge 214692 214694
retitle 214694 g++-3.3 (3.3.2) should depend on gcc-3.3 (= 3.3.2)
thanks
xiphmont writes:
On Wed, Oct 08, 2003 at 07:09:19AM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
tags 214694
Andreas Metzler writes:
BTW, does anybody know why glibc's dependencies are that strict, i.e.
why locales depends on the exact same version of libc6? I am sure that
compability breaks at some point but I wonder if e.g. locales 2.3.2.ds1-10
would not run fine with libc6 2.3.2.ds1-9.
see
Package: libc6
Version: 2.3.2-2
Severity: serious
This is strange... I am able to reproduce this. Something to do with
the new glibc (on i386 only?)?
- Packages built yesterday (using python2.3-3) are ok, see gadly in
http://ftp-master.debian.org/~doko/python/
- The same package built after
tags 214694 + unreproducible
thanks
unable to reproduce. what is the contents of confdefs.h?
xiphmont writes:
Package: gcc-3.3
Version: 1:3.3.2-0pre5
Severity: grave
Tags: sid
Justification: renders package unusable
I apologize for originally filing this against libc6-dev; I see
this
reassign 214692 g++-3.3
reassign 214694 g++-3.3
severity 214692 normal
severity 214694 normal
merge 214692 214694
retitle 214694 g++-3.3 (3.3.2) should depend on gcc-3.3 (= 3.3.2)
thanks
xiphmont writes:
On Wed, Oct 08, 2003 at 07:09:19AM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
tags 214694
Andreas Metzler writes:
BTW, does anybody know why glibc's dependencies are that strict, i.e.
why locales depends on the exact same version of libc6? I am sure that
compability breaks at some point but I wonder if e.g. locales 2.3.2.ds1-10
would not run fine with libc6 2.3.2.ds1-9.
see
Tobias writes:
Attached is a small script that shows the difference between the too.
Personally I think the tcsh is better sorted because of the difference
between A and a.
bash's behaviour is different than tcsh, dash, zsh, ksh.
bash --norc
LANG=sv_SE
power-post-setup.bmp
ls: [A-Z][A-Z]*:
This is not a bug, i386 support is dropped, gcc is configured to
generate code for i486 and up. IIRC the kernel binaries for i386 do
have a patch for emulation support for non-i386 instructions.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL
Karolina Lindqvist writes:
lördagen den 7 februari 2004 18.01 you wrote:
This is not a bug, i386 support is dropped, gcc is configured to
generate code for i486 and up. IIRC the kernel binaries for i386 do
have a patch for emulation support for non-i386 instructions.
So it's not a bug,
Package: glibc
To build the hppa - hppa64 cross compiler needed to build hppa64
kernels, the target specific headers are needed. Currently it's good
enough to symlink /usr/hppa64-linux/include to /usr/include.
Please include this symlink in the libc6-dev package for hppa or build
a new
Sven Luther writes:
First, i found that this gcc-3.4 package in experimental wasn't yet
built on powerpc, which i did. It did output lot of FAILs in the tests
later on, but i am not sure this is worrying or not.
Please have a look at http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/ and compare.
It
This patch applied upstream
http://sources.redhat.com/ml/libc-hacker/2003-12/msg00025.html
is supposed to fix about 900 test failures in the libjava testsuite in
gcc-3.4. Note that I didn't test the patch myself.
Matthias
Compare the Debian test results
Sven Luther writes:
That said, i have close to zero deep understanding on how glibc and gcc
interact on this issue, and what is going on about libgcc. I am told by
the #ppc64 folk that i should compile gcc with the ppc64 target, but
have it default to 32bit code by default. My early tries for
Package: glibc
[submitted for keeping track of
http://lists.debian.org/debian-glibc/2004/debian-glibc-200404/msg00035.html]
This patch applied upstream
http://sources.redhat.com/ml/libc-hacker/2003-12/msg00025.html
is supposed to fix about 900 test failures in the libjava testsuite in
gcc-3.4.
On http://people.debian.org/~doko/gcc-3.[34] you find packages with a
setup to build biarch compilers on powerpc (which needs a 64bit glibc
as a build dependency).
- gcc-3.3: added a patch to build from the hammer branch (3.3.4). This
works on i386, fails on amd64, powerpc unknown. edit
The bug submitter claims that a missing /proc leads to ICE's in gcc
and thinks this might be a bug in glibc or gcc. Any ideas? I'm unable
to reproduce this one.
Matthias
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
severity 263601 + serious
thanks
according to Dan binutils won't be fixed/cannot be fixed for
sarge. Please apply this workaround.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Package: qt-x11-free
Version: 3:3.3.3-4
Severity: serious
[please don't reassign yet, let's evaluate it first; this is the
package that most people would expect to find a report]
when building on arm-linux, uic enters an infinite loop building
pixmapfunction.h. It's not the first uic invocation
Thomas Bushnell BSG writes:
On behalf of Debian QA:
Matthias, you reopened bug 266598 which according to Blars Blarson was
fixed, and there is no indication in the reopen message why. Was this
a mistake?
No. I did build glibc using binutils 2.14.x and did upload it to
unstable. So it's
Package: glibc
Severity: serious
Tags: sid
current mainline libgcj fails to build on mips{,el}:
/home/doko/gcc/gcc-snapshot-20041003/build/gcc/xgcc -shared-libgcc
-B/home/doko/gcc/gcc-snapshot-20041003/build/gcc/ -nostdinc++
Ian Wienand writes:
On Mon, Nov 22, 2004 at 05:30:38PM -0800, David Mosberger wrote:
That would make sense. libstdc++5 calls _Unwind_Resume() which
is/should be implemented by libunwind.so.7. With older versions of
GCC, it was implemented as part of libgcc_eh.a/libgcc_s.so.
Actually,
David Mosberger writes:
On Tue, 23 Nov 2004 09:27:52 +0100, Matthias Klose [EMAIL PROTECTED]
said:
Matthias Is the patch in #278836 a prerequisite for the above
Matthias changes, or can it be done without it?
If the gas-patch isn't applied, you run the risk of getting wrong
unwind
David Mosberger writes:
On Wed, 24 Nov 2004 00:26:01 +0100, Matthias Klose [EMAIL PROTECTED]
said:
Matthias From my point of view we can get around with it by
Matthias including the libunwind shared library in libgcc1 for the
Matthias sarge release. I'm worried about the version
Matthieu Delahaye writes:
On Wed, 2004-11-24 at 17:36, Ian Wienand wrote:
On Wed, Nov 24, 2004 at 12:46:12AM +0100, Matthias Klose wrote:
ok, Ian, if it's ok with you, I'll prepare a libunwind upload, which
plays well with a libgcc1 package including the libunwind7 shared
libs
not
+use C99 designators, as C++ does not have support for them.
+
+ -- Matthias Klose [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mon, 29 Nov 2004 00:11:44 +0100
diff -u glibc-2.3.2.ds1/debian/patches/00list
glibc-2.3.2.ds1/debian/patches/00list
--- glibc-2.3.2.ds1/debian/patches/00list
+++ glibc-2.3.2.ds1/debian
H. J. Lu writes:
On Tue, Dec 07, 2004 at 12:16:56AM -0800, David Mosberger wrote:
On Tue, 7 Dec 2004 09:01:33 +0100, Matthias Klose [EMAIL PROTECTED]
said:
Matthias glibc now fails to build from source:
Matthias undefined reference to `__gcc_personality_v0'
Argh, looks
H. J. Lu writes:
On Thu, Dec 09, 2004 at 12:49:38PM +0100, Matthias Klose wrote:
H. J. Lu writes:
On Tue, Dec 07, 2004 at 12:16:56AM -0800, David Mosberger wrote:
On Tue, 7 Dec 2004 09:01:33 +0100, Matthias Klose [EMAIL
PROTECTED] said:
Matthias glibc now fails to build
of Jeff Bailey. Closes: #284563.
-- Matthias Klose [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri, 10 Dec 2004 11:05:00 -0800
diff -u glibc-2.3.2.ds1/debian/control.in/main
glibc-2.3.2.ds1/debian/control.in/main
--- glibc-2.3.2.ds1/debian/control.in/main
+++ glibc-2.3.2.ds1/debian/control.in/main
@@ -1,7 +1,7
1 - 100 of 173 matches
Mail list logo
