On Sat, Feb 23, 2002 at 10:57:53 +0100, J.H.M. Dassen (Ray) wrote:
> The real bug seems to be that gcc-doc, g77-doc, gpc-doc and cpp-doc are
> still available in testing - AFAICT the should be removed from testing.
> (The problem does not occur with sid, as these packages are no longer
> available in unstable)
I've looked at it a bit more closely.
This is the list of binary packages that are built from the 'gcc' source
package:
cpp-doc : obsolete (superceded by cpp-2.95-doc)
g77-doc : obsolete (superceded by g77-2.95-doc)
gcc-doc : obsolete (superceded by gcc-2.95-doc)
gpc-doc : obsolete (superceded by gpc-2.95-doc)
chill : now built from gcc-defaults
cpp : now built from gcc-defaults
g++ : now built from gcc-defaults
g77 : now built from gcc-defaults
gcc : now built from gcc-defaults
gcj : now built from gcc-defaults
gobjc : now built from gcc-defaults
gpc : now built from gcc-defaults
libg++2.8.1.3-dbg : now built from gcc-2.95
libg++2.8.1.3-dev : now built from gcc-2.95
libg++2.8.1.3-glibc2.2 : now built from gcc-2.95
libstdc++2.10-dbg : now built from gcc-2.95
libstdc++2.10-dev : now built from gcc-2.95
libstdc++2.10-glibc2.2 : now built from gcc-2.95
protoize : now built from gcc-3.0
So I guess the right thing to do would be to reassign this bug to
ftp.debian.org and ask for the removal of the "gcc" source package from
testing as well as of the "cpp-doc", "g77-doc", "gcc-doc" and "gpc-doc"
binary packages associated with it.
Comments anyone?
Ray
--
To this day we are still wondering what exactly it is, besides prices, that
Microsoft has innovated.
Seen on segfault.org
