Your message dated Fri, 3 Aug 2001 22:40:30 +0200
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#107587: gcc and gcc-3.0 should support alternatives
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
Package: libstdc++3-dev
Version: 1:3.0.1-0pre010801
I cannot compile a trivial C++ program because of errors in the
standard library headers.
Example program: test.cc
#include
int main();
Example execution:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ g++-3.0 test.cc
In file included from /usr/includ
Package: gcc
Version: Version: 2:2.95.4-5
Hello, ...
i just finished a new unstable install, and got the following error as i wanted
to build a package :
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/debian/ocaml/ocaml-3.02$ gcc -o /tmp/gcc /tmp/gcc.c
cc1: /tmp/ccoDern9.i: Invalid argument
/tmp/gcc.c is just a plain em
I'm unable to test this on sparc (Ben?). Anyway:
- which packages and versions are installed before? (gcc-3.0,
gcc-3.0-sparc64, gcc-3.0-base)
- does removing the old packages (gcc-3.0, gcc-3.0-sparc64) work
around the problem?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> Package: gcc-3.0-sparc64
> Version
On Fri, Aug 03, 2001 at 07:09:47PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
> I'm unable to test this on sparc (Ben?). Anyway:
>
> - which packages and versions are installed before? (gcc-3.0,
> gcc-3.0-sparc64, gcc-3.0-base)
>
> - does removing the old packages (gcc-3.0, gcc-3.0-sparc64) work
> around t
Package: gcc
Version: 2:2.95.4-5
Severity: wishlist
gcc should use 'update-alternative', so that user can define
easily (and in a std manner) the default compiler.
giacomo
-- System Information
Debian Release: testing/unstable
Architecture: i386
Kernel: Linux gmiabla 2.4.8-pre3 #3 Tue Jul
Package: gcc-3.0-sparc64
Version: 1:3.0.1-0pre010801
Severity: grave
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ sudo apt-get -yf install gcc-3.0-sparc64
Reading Package Lists... Done
Building Dependency Tree... Done
1 packages upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 0 not upgraded.
1 packages not fully installed
Your message dated Fri, 03 Aug 2001 11:14:17 +0200
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line fixed in 3.0.1-0pre010801
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 is now your responsi
8 matches
Mail list logo