Bug#106252: debian ia64 support for gcc-3.0 [patch]

Package: gcc-3.0 Version: 3.0.ds9 Severity: serious Tags: patch X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-ia64@lists.debian.org Here's a patch for the ia64 packaging bits. I get a lot of regression test errors, but they seem to be comparable to what we get on hppa and mips. Enjoy :) randolph diff -uNr gcc-3.0-3.0.

Bug#87300: marked as done (gcj/libjava bootstrap error)

Your message dated Sun, 22 Jul 2001 14:56:50 -0400 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#87300: fixed in gcc-3.0 3.0.1.ds0-0pre010721 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

gcc-3.0_3.0.1.ds0-0pre010721_i386.changes INSTALLED

Installing: gcc-3.0-doc_3.0.1-0pre010721_all.deb to pool/main/g/gcc-3.0/gcc-3.0-doc_3.0.1-0pre010721_all.deb gcc-3.0_3.0.1.ds0.orig.tar.gz to pool/main/g/gcc-3.0/gcc-3.0_3.0.1.ds0.orig.tar.gz libffi2-dev_3.0.1-0pre010721_i386.deb to pool/main/g/gcc-3.0/libffi2-dev_3.0.1-0pre010721_i386.deb g

gcc-3.0 override disparity

There are disparities between your recently installed upload and the override file for the following file(s): libstdc++3_3.0.1-0pre010721_i386.deb: priority is overridden from required to standard. Either the package or the override file is incorrect. If you think the override is correct and th

Bug#103468: marked as done (libgcj2: gij links to itself)

Your message dated Sun, 22 Jul 2001 14:56:49 -0400 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#103468: fixed in gcc-3.0 3.0.1.ds0-0pre010721 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

Bug#103568: marked as done (gcc-3.0_3.0.ds9-4(unstable): fails to build from source)

Your message dated Sun, 22 Jul 2001 14:56:49 -0400 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#103568: fixed in gcc-3.0 3.0.1.ds0-0pre010721 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

Bug#103883: marked as done (libgcj2: symlink loop problem with gij)

Your message dated Sun, 22 Jul 2001 14:56:49 -0400 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#103883: fixed in gcc-3.0 3.0.1.ds0-0pre010721 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

Bug#105371: marked as done (gcc-3.0: grammar & spelling fixes for README.Debian [patch])

Your message dated Sun, 22 Jul 2001 14:56:50 -0400 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#105371: fixed in gcc-3.0 3.0.1.ds0-0pre010721 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

Is this a bug?

Hi, The following program : #include class Clonable { public: virtual Clonable * Clone() = 0; }; class IsClonable : public Clonable { public: int randomMember; Clonable * Clone() { return new IsClonable; } }

ice-on-illegal

>Submitter-Id: net-debian >Originator:Franck Branjonneau >Organization: >Confidential: no >Synopsis: ice on illegal code >Severity: non-critical >Priority: ? >Category: c++ >Class: ice-on-illegal-code >Release: 3.0 (Debian) (Debian testing/unstable)

Processed: reassign gcc bug

Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > reassign 65406 gcc-2.95-doc Bug#65406: gcc -dumpspecs undocumented Bug reassigned from package `gcc-doc' to `gcc-2.95-doc'. > tags 65406 + fixed Bug#65406: gcc -dumpspecs undocumented Tags added: fixed > retitle 65406 [fixed in gcc-3.0] gcc -dumpspecs