Re: Bug#753079: c++11 mode in GCC is still marked as experimental (although armel needs work)

2014-07-14 Thread Guo Yixuan
Then recent commit has >> + if(NOT BOOST_USE_CXX11) >> + add_definitions("-DBOOST_NO_CXX11_SCOPED_ENUMS") >> + endif() >> >> Are these kind of updates needed? >> >> Guo Yixuan, >> >> Can you talk to the upstream on this issue and what oldschool

Re: Bug#753079: c++11 mode in GCC is still marked as experimental (although armel needs work)

2014-07-13 Thread Guo Yixuan
s: > > -if(UNIX) > - add_definitions("-std=c++11") > -endif(UNIX) > > Then recent commit has > + if(NOT BOOST_USE_CXX11) > + add_definitions("-DBOOST_NO_CXX11_SCOPED_ENUMS") > + endif() > > Are these kind of updates needed? > > Guo Yixuan

Re: Bug#753079: c++11 mode in GCC is still marked as experimental (although armel needs work)

2014-07-12 Thread Guo Yixuan
Control: forwarded 754199 https://code.google.com/p/rimeime/issues/detail?id=632 Control: tag 754199 + upstream Hello, On Sat, Jul 12, 2014 at 11:10 AM, Osamu Aoki wrote: > > Hi > > On Sat, Jul 12, 2014 at 02:00:35PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote: > > I would rather drop any package which does use

Re: c++11 mode in GCC is still marked as experimental (although armel needs work)

2014-07-12 Thread Steve Langasek
On Sat, Jul 12, 2014 at 02:00:35PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote: > On Sat, Jul 12, 2014 at 00:08:28 +0900, Osamu Aoki wrote: > > But this seems toi be a bug porter amd GCC maintainer has to address. > > If they can not, we should drop armel from Debian. > I would rather drop any package which does

Re: c++11 mode in GCC is still marked as experimental (although armel needs work)

2014-07-12 Thread Osamu Aoki
Hi On Sat, Jul 12, 2014 at 02:00:35PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote: > I would rather drop any package which does use c++11 features without any > reflection. I now understand the problem. Thanks. On Sat, Jul 12, 2014 at 01:10:52PM +0200, Julien Cristau wrote: > No, just because some random c++1

c++11 mode in GCC is still marked as experimental (although armel needs work)

2014-07-12 Thread Matthias Klose
On Sat, Jul 12, 2014 at 00:08:28 +0900, Osamu Aoki wrote: > But this seems toi be a bug porter amd GCC maintainer has to address. > If they can not, we should drop armel from Debian. I would rather drop any package which does use c++11 features without any reflection. The c++11 status in GCC (and

Re: Bug#485147: iozone3: no armel architecture .deb available for this package, although it build/runs

2008-06-08 Thread Steve M. Robbins
Jim, On Sun, Jun 08, 2008 at 08:51:45AM -0600, Jim Freeman wrote: > Package: iozone3 > Version: 287-2 > Severity: important > > I used dpkg to fetch/build iozone3 source on armel, and it seemed to > build/run just fine. > > Can I be of any use in getting an armel architecture version of this > p

although

2000-10-21 Thread Chris Rutter
I hasten to point out it might not be the kernel sources involved, but a toolchain issue. c.