Your message dated Tue, 27 Mar 2001 07:38:51 +0200 (MEST)
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#91846: g++: /usr/doc/g++-2.95/README.C++ mentions docs but
not package
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been de
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> reassign 91823 gcc-2.95
Bug#91823: binutils will not build on arm
Bug reassigned from package `binutils' to `gcc-2.95'.
> stop
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
Darren Benham
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)
Package: g++
Version: 1:2.95.3-5
Severity: normal
/usr/doc/g++-2.95/README.C++ says STL docs are in /usr/doc/stl-manual;
it should also mention that it requires the stl-manual package.
-- System Information
Debian Release: testing/unstable
Kernel Version: Linux zewt.org 2.4.2-XFS #4 SMP Thu Feb 2
On Mon, 26 Mar 2001, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> If you do, please look at devel.linuxppc.com/users/fsirl/ for a current
> version of the patch.
Tried the new one and it still dies. I'll break it down and see what is
causing the failure. Obviously, we can rule out the rs6000-specific
patches, s
On Mon, 26 Mar 2001, Ben Collins wrote:
> Does alpha have the latest gcc-2.95 built for it? If you aren't using
> that, you are probably seeing the weak sym problem.
Yes, it does (-8 is in the pool for Alpha). I haven't looked into the
weak sym problem on Alpha yet (still busy trying to catch u
On Mon, Mar 26, 2001 at 03:26:44PM -0500, Christopher C. Chimelis wrote:
>
> FYI, on Alpha, I get:
>
> ~/testing > make
> cc-c -o fubar.o fubar.c
> cc-c -o bar.o bar.c
> cc-c -o foo.o foo.c
> cc -shared -o libfoo.so foo.o -lc
> cc -shared -o libbar.so bar.o -L. -lfoo -lc
> # libbar de
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> reassign 91512 gcc-2.95
Bug#91512: problem with atexit and shared libraries
Bug reassigned from package `binutils' to `gcc-2.95'.
> thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
Darren Benham
(administrator, Debian Bugs d
We need this in the next gcc-2.95 ASAP, please. This only affects i386.
All other archs appear to work fine.
- Forwarded message from "H . J . Lu" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -
X-From_: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mon Mar 26 15:06:50 2001
From: "H . J . Lu" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Ben Collins <[EMAIL PROT
On Mon, Mar 26, 2001 at 12:00:37AM -0500, Christopher C. Chimelis wrote:
>
> On Mon, 26 Mar 2001, Matthias Klose wrote:
>
> > Does the current source version (-8) work ok on all architectures?
> > I remember someone of you said something about non applicable
> > patches, or an out of date patch f
On Mon, 26 Mar 2001, Matt Taggart wrote:
> Since we're using gcc-3.0 for the hppa port I've been running into some
> packages that break with the new compilers. Since hppa is a young port and
> still has some problems I'm often not sure if it's an hppa problem or a
> gcc-3.0 problem. Even if I
Hi debian-gcc,
Since we're using gcc-3.0 for the hppa port I've been running into some
packages that break with the new compilers. Since hppa is a young port and
still has some problems I'm often not sure if it's an hppa problem or a
gcc-3.0 problem. Even if I think it's a gcc-3.0 problem it it
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. Have I got that correct? Is this
working? I'm interested in making it work for hppa
12 matches
Mail list logo
