Matthias Klose wrote:
[should we drop parisc-linux?]
John David Anglin writes:
Er, no; we're talking about official Debian packages here, and the
libstdc++.so.6 in Debian is now from gcc-4.1. The problem is precisely that
GMP *is* being built using gcc-4.0, but libstdc++ is from gcc-4.1, resul
Package: libssp0-dev
Version: 4.1.0-2
Severity: normal
Neither libssp0-dev or libssp0 contain any documentation on how to use
them!
-- System Information:
Debian Release: testing/unstable
APT prefers unstable
APT policy: (500, 'unstable'), (500, 'testing'), (1, 'experimental')
Architecture: i
--- Comment #1 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-04 18:10 ---
It isn't clear what exception we ought to throw here.
What is happening is that we've found a .class file for a class
we're searching for, but libgcj is not configured to properly
handle class files.
VirtualMachineE
--- Comment #7 from dberlin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-04 16:57 ---
Subject: Bug 27093
This should fix it.
--- Comment #8 from dberlin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-04 16:57 ---
Created an attachment (id=11374)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=11374&ac
--- Comment #6 from dberlin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-04 16:52 ---
G. These phi nodes are all dead, but it still is verifying them anyway.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27093
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You reported the bug, or are
Le Jeu 4 Mai 2006 09:01, Dererk a écrit :
> I wonder if that means the bug was set as resolved/fixed...
>
> I'm afraid I still having the same bug...
>
> Waiting for news...
it means that the bug is *maybe* fixed upstream. meaning in the next
version.
--
·O· Pierre Habouzit
··O
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> # bts-link upstream status pull for source package gcc-4.0
> # see http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2006/05/msg1.html
> #
> user [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Setting user to [EMAIL PROTECTED] (was [EMAIL PROTECTED]).
> usertags 33975 + status-NEW
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> # bts-link upstream status pull for source package gcc-3.3
> # see http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2006/05/msg1.html
> #
> user [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Setting user to [EMAIL PROTECTED] (was [EMAIL PROTECTED]).
> usertags 73065 + status-RESO
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> # bts-link upstream status pull for source package gcc-4.1
> # see http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2006/05/msg1.html
> #
> user [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Setting user to [EMAIL PROTECTED] (was [EMAIL PROTECTED]).
> usertags 36600 + status-SUSP
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> # bts-link upstream status pull for source package gcc-snapshot
> # see http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2006/05/msg1.html
> #
> user [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Setting user to [EMAIL PROTECTED] (was [EMAIL PROTECTED]).
> usertags 332683 + statu
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> # bts-link upstream status pull for source package gcc-3.4
> # see http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2006/05/msg1.html
> #
> user [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Setting user to [EMAIL PROTECTED] (was [EMAIL PROTECTED]).
> usertags 67206 + status-RESO
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> # bts-link upstream status pull for source package gcj-4.0
> # see http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2006/05/msg1.html
> #
> user [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Setting user to [EMAIL PROTECTED] (was [EMAIL PROTECTED]).
> usertags 165635 + status-RES
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I wonder if that means the bug was set as resolved/fixed...
I'm afraid I still having the same bug...
Waiting for news...
Dererk
- --
[EMAIL PROTECTED]: ~$ cat /proc/version {Pipe} grep -i 'power in your hands'
Debian GNUine Perception
- -Fortun
13 matches
Mail list logo
