Package: libstdc++2.10
Version: 1:2.95.2-14
Severity: important
The attached C++ program doesn't build with g++-2.95. According to
the documentation it should, and under g++-3.0 it does build (using
libstdc++-3) And it of course builds with gcc-2.95 (if I do a C
version)
Well I can use if I
#de
You have been invited to check out this adult site
by one of your friends who visited us.
our URL is http://www.openxxx.net/
enjoy,
OpenXXX TEAM 2001
Your message dated Sat, 14 Jul 2001 11:43:47 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#105238: g++-3.0 fails to find system headers when
-I/usr/include is used
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt w
reassign 105223 gcc
thanks
Good spotting, and the english is fine. Only thing that was wrong was
it was against "base" instead of gcc, but that's fixed with this mesage.
- Forwarded message from loic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -
From: loic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Bug#105223: GCC failed to c
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> reassign 105223 gcc
Bug#105223: GCC failed to compile this programme
Bug reassigned from package `base' to `gcc'.
> thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
Darren Benham
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)
Package: libstdc++3-dev
Version: 1:3.0-4
Severity: serious
The test program "strtest.cc":
#include
int main()
{
return 0;
}
$ g++-3.0 -c strtest.cc
In file included from /usr/include/g++-v3/cstdio:31,
from /usr/include/g++-v3/arm-linux/bits/c++io.h:35,
Package: g++-3.0
Version: 3.0-4
Hello,
This bug report may need to be redirected to a different package
(cpp-3.0 or libstdc++3-dev).
Adding "-I/usr/include" to the compile line of g++-3.0 can cause
system headers in /usr/include to *not* be found. This is due to the
use of #include_next inside
Your message dated Sat, 14 Jul 2001 01:42:24 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#105102: Build failure on ia64 (at least)
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it i
On Fri, Jul 13, 2001 at 10:05:29AM +0200, Laurent Bonnaud wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> you write that "apparently", g++ 3.0 tries a longer conversion chain
> than 2.95. Indeed, the compiler message let us think so. But to
> verify this, I added traces into your testcase. The result is that
> both g++ ve
Package: gcc-3.0
Version: 3.0.ds9-4
Priority: serious
Filing this serious because hppa plans to release with woody. As the
Debian Architecture Bug Squash party continues this weekend, it is quite
likely that additional info and/or patches may be added to this defect.
The following build failure
10 matches
Mail list logo
