Bug#168346: bug fixed in gcc-3.x using -std=c99

On Thu, Jan 02, 2003 at 02:58:54AM +0100, Matthias Klose wrote: > Starting with gcc-3.x, gcc accepts the option -std=c99. using this > option LLONG_MAX is defined. Please could someone verify, that > LLONG_MAX is required by C99, but not LONG_LONG_MAX. According to my copy of the standard, this is

Bug#153478: Document refered to in info should be distrubuted with package

On Wed, 2003-01-01 at 18:10, Matthias Klose wrote: > The location http://people.debian.org/~karlheg/Usenix88-lexic.pdf > isn't valid anymore. You may find it at: http://www.hegbloom.net/~karlheg/Usenix88-lexic.pdf Please try and contact the author, get permission if possible, then include this

Bug#67206: follwup for #67206

On Thu, Jan 02, 2003 at 02:29:51AM +0100, Matthias Klose wrote: > Herbert, please could you send a followup (using gcc-3.2 and > gcc-snapshot)? The assembly code generated by gcc-3.2 is the same as what you got in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> which is part of the bug log. -- Debian GNU/Linux 3.0 is out! (

Bug#160029: marked as done (gcc-snapshot_20020907-1(hppa/unstable): FTBFS: g++ errors)

Your message dated Thu, 2 Jan 2003 04:18:36 +0100 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line gcc-snapshot builds on hppa again 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 r

Bug#143188: limits.h points back to the itself with gcc 2.95.4-14

Please could you - give an example for a source file, where this happens. - try to reproduce this behaviour with gcc-3.2.

野蛮的 万网（www.net.cn) ！！！！

野蛮的 万网（www.net.cn) 因为万网得蛮横无理，造成本人使用了3年的域名被人家使用。 本人列出 万网的 对用户不公平的地方 1，2002年初 擅自更改合同服务款，变相增加收费，全国专业it 媒体已经报道过。 2，2002年初 违反合同条款 提高域名的收费 原合同 70， 现在收费是150。 3,客户注册的域名信息里面，所有域名管理信息为万网的信息，没有提供客户的信息。 4，内部管理混乱，同一个服务问题 要几十次人次 才能得到一个 模糊的回答。 5，随心所欲的屏蔽客户域名（就因为收到3份邮件，没有警告就屏蔽了），没有违法任何合同条款。 6，在交涉无果后，（联系了最少100个

Processed: please recheck with gpc-2.95.4-9 (final gpc-2.1 release)

Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > tags 135727 + helpneeded Unknown tag/s: helpneeded. Recognized are: patch wontfix moreinfo unreproducible fixed potato woody sid help security upstream pending sarge experimental d-i. Bug#135727: buffer overflow (?) in writeln There were no tags set.

Bug#89023: marked as done ([PR 3994, m68k] does not buid, uses illegal assembler code?)

Your message dated Thu, 2 Jan 2003 03:31:37 +0100 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Unable to reproduce with current gcc-2.95 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 no

Bug#153478: Document refered to in info should be distrubuted with package

The location http://people.debian.org/~karlheg/Usenix88-lexic.pdf isn't valid anymore.

Bug#168346: bug fixed in gcc-3.x using -std=c99

Starting with gcc-3.x, gcc accepts the option -std=c99. using this option LLONG_MAX is defined. Please could someone verify, that LLONG_MAX is required by C99, but not LONG_LONG_MAX. Thanks, Matthias

Processed: retitle gcc report

Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > retitle 154767 [fixed in 3.x] cpp-2.95 fails to parse macros with varargs > correctly Bug#154767: cpp-2.95: cpp fails to parse macros with varargs correctly Changed Bug title. > tags 154767 + fixed Bug#154767: [fixed in 3.x] cpp-2.95 fails to parse ma

Bug#88959: marked as done ([PR optimization/3513]: GCC doesn't merge substrings)

Your message dated Thu, 2 Jan 2003 02:33:58 +0100 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line bug report closed upstream as "not a bug" 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 no

Processed: tagging fixed gcc reports

Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > retitle 42946 [fixed in 3.4] Parse errors for "simple" code Bug#42946: [Known bug] Parse errors for "simple" code Changed Bug title. > retitle 55298 [PR c/3481, partly fixed in 3.2] function attributes should > apply to function pointers too Bug#55298

Processed: reassign gcc report to binutils

Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > reassign 168235 binutils Bug#168235: gcc doesn't link with profiled libc when -pg is used Bug reassigned from package `gcc-2.95' to `binutils'. > tags 168235 unreproducible Bug#168235: gcc doesn't link with profiled libc when -pg is used There were no

Bug#12253: gcc documentation on attribute syntax updated upstream

retitle 12253 [PR c/6904, updated in 3.1/3.2] GCC attribute syntax tags 12253 + fixed reassign 12253 gcc-2.95 thanks

Processed: gcc documentation on attribute syntax updated upstream

Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > retitle 12253 [PR c/6904, updated in 3.1/3.2] GCC attribute syntax Bug#12253: [PR c/6904] GCC attribute syntax Changed Bug title. > tags 12253 + fixed Bug#12253: [PR c/6904, updated in 3.1/3.2] GCC attribute syntax There were no tags set. Bug#43119: [P

Bug#87063: marked as done ([PR libstdc++/3552] missing hash function for std::string)

Your message dated Thu, 2 Jan 2003 02:06:00 +0100 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line gcc report closed upstream 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

Bug#45479: marked as done ([alpha] gcc 2.95.1 -O2 problem compiling oo2c_64)

Your message dated Thu, 2 Jan 2003 01:54:53 +0100 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line no feedback for gcc-report, closing 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

Re: help needed with logwatcher in 3.2.2ds3

On Wed, Jan 01, 2003 at 07:29:13PM +0100, Matthias Klose wrote: > This build includes a logwatcher in debian/rules2 in the check > target. It prints out a line, if the testsuite is still running, but > no messages are written to stdout (due to no test cases failing). The > process is started in the

help needed with logwatcher in 3.2.2ds3

This build includes a logwatcher in debian/rules2 in the check target. It prints out a line, if the testsuite is still running, but no messages are written to stdout (due to no test cases failing). The process is started in the background, and after the testsuite finishes, it is killed ... should b

Bug#174906: marked as done (gcc-3.2_1:3.2.2ds3-0pre3(unstable/ia64): FTBFS: source dir exists)

Your message dated Wed, 01 Jan 2003 10:11:29 -0700 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#174906: gcc-3.2_1:3.2.2ds3-0pre3(unstable/ia64): FTBFS: source dir exists has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt

Bug#174906: gcc-3.2_1:3.2.2ds3-0pre3(unstable/ia64): FTBFS: source dir exists

This seems to be a problem with the autobuilder. Look at the beginning of the log. the unpacked sources have future timestamps. tar: gcc-20021231/INSTALL: time stamp 2002-12-31 12:52:51 is 5700 s in the future tar: gcc-20021231/boehm-gc/Mac_files: time stamp 2002-12-31 12:52:51 is 5700 s in the

Bug#174906: gcc-3.2_1:3.2.2ds3-0pre3(unstable/ia64): FTBFS: source dir exists

Package: gcc-3.2 Version: 1:3.2.2ds3-0pre3 Severity: serious This version fails to build on the ia64 autobuilder as shown below. Bdale | Automatic build of gcc-3.2_1:3.2.2ds3-0pre3 on caballero by sbuild/ia64 1.169 | Build started at 20021231-1113 [...] | mkdir stamps | mkdir: cannot create di