On 05/14/2012 10:27 AM, Adam D. Barratt wrote: > On 14.05.2012 09:10, Matthias Klose wrote: >> On 13.05.2012 21:58, Adam D. Barratt wrote: >>> On 13.05.2012 18:42, Matthias Klose wrote: >>>> On 13.05.2012 21:22, Julien Cristau wrote: >>>>> On Sun, May 13, 2012 at 18:58:42 +0200, Matthias Klose wrote: >>>>>> which ones? are there any reports which are not tagged? I went through >>>>>> the list of Lucas' new batch and tagged the appropriate ones. >>>>>> >>>>> There were again some more in the last couple days. They should be tagged >>>>> AFAIK. >>>> >>>> I am only aware of these usertags: >>>> [email protected] / qa-ftbfs-20120508 >>>> do you known about a new rebuild? >>> >>> From a trivial look the set from #672397 onwards on the usertagged bug list >>> were >>> all filed in the past three days. >> >> looking at 98 and 99 this doesn't seem to be a "set". > > They're a "set" in that they appear after each other on the usertagged bug > list. I didn't say they had sequential bug numbers, but possibly could have > chosen a better description.
After rebuilding gpsd today I had to realize that the stack protector makes one of the tools segfault since it was built with gcc 4.7. If gpsd wouldn't ship with a largish test suite this fault would probably never have been detected before the release - so this makes me wonder how many non-obvious bugs like this the switch to 4.7 introduced - and how much the release of Whezy will be delayed because of it. -- Bernd Zeimetz Debian GNU/Linux Developer http://bzed.de http://www.debian.org GPG Fingerprint: ECA1 E3F2 8E11 2432 D485 DD95 EB36 171A 6FF9 435F -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
