Package: gcc-3.3
Version: 1:3.3.4-13
Tags: patch
This was sent to debian-ia64, I'm filing the appropriate bugs for it.
Including this patch would be a great help.
- Forwarded message from David Mosberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -
I have grown increasingly concerned that even with the curren
On Mon, Jun 28, 2004 at 07:08:36PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
> hppa is the only platform with gcc-3.0/g++-3.0. Is this version still
> needed for hppa builds, or can it be removed? On all other platforms,
> we just build the libstdc++ runtime library (but doesn't seem to be
> needed, I haven't s
On Sun, Jan 25, 2004 at 11:03:53AM -0700, Grant Grundler wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 25, 2004 at 06:05:17PM +0100, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> > But the root of the problem lies in gcc 3.0.4 since it is OK in 3.3.2. So
> > wouldn't it be easier to identify and backport the fix from 3.3.2 to 3.0.4
> > and infor
On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 09:03:16PM -0500, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
> Matthias Klose wrote:
> >gcc-3.3 is configured with --enable-sjlj-exceptions (done to keep
> >compatibility with gcc-3.2). I don't know if the dwarf2 unwinder will
> >work with this setup.
>
> To be much more specific, it is confi
On Sat, Aug 09, 2003 at 03:32:12PM +0900, GOTO Masanori wrote:
> At Sat, 9 Aug 2003 02:52:01 +0100,
> Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ sudo /etc/init.d/apache start
> > Starting web server: apache/etc/init.d/apache: line 70: 29184 Segmentation
> > faul
Package: gcc-defaults
Version: 1.8
Severity: serious
Architecture: ia64
Automatic build of gcc-defaults_1.8 on caballero by sbuild/ia64 1.170.4
Build started at 20030811-0235
**
[...]
dh_installchangelogs -pcpp
mv debian
On Wed, May 21, 2003 at 01:42:53AM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
> For Debian GNU/Linux gcc-3.3 is currently configured with
>
> --with-sjlj-exceptions
>
> to allow a binary compatible upgrade from gcc-3.2 to gcc-3.3. The
> other Debian platform, where sjlj based exceptions changed to dwarf2
On Sun, Mar 02, 2003 at 11:33:18AM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote:
> Please drop shared library support altogether. It is currently not
> worth the trouble. GNAT ABIs change from version to version, and the
> run-time library can be built only with the corresponding version of
> the compiler. This
On Sun, Mar 02, 2003 at 09:36:17AM +, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> Second problem: dependencies in the debian/control file. They probably
> look something like this:
>
> Build-Depends: gnat (>= 3.14p-1), gnat (<< 3.15)
> and
> Depends: gnat (>= 3.14p-1), gnat (&
I confess to having made an omission when drawing up the gcc-3.2
transition plan. I concentrated on C++ and completely ignored other
languages. I do not know what (if anything) nees to be done for Java
or Fortran. However, I've done a small amount of investigation on
what needs to be done for A
Package: gcc-3.2
Version: 3.2.1ds5-0pre6
Severity: minor
I was just reviewing the .diff.gz to prove a point (Debian diverges
significantly from upstream! Does not! Does too! Does not!) and I
noticed several files were present in CVS conflict version; ie:
+++ gcc-3.2-3.2.1ds5/debian/.#changelo
On Fri, Aug 16, 2002 at 08:38:53PM +0200, Martin v. Loewis wrote:
> In Jeff's plan: All C++ packages will be uploaded via NMUs. The
> package maintainer can upload their packages afterwards if they have
> to make other corrections.
All of them? I sw someone do a count and there were around 1000 p
On Fri, Aug 16, 2002 at 09:59:28AM -0700, Sean 'Shaleh' Perry wrote:
> > * Add a Conflict with the non-`c' version of the package.
>
> why can't we have both installed, just like the libfoo6 and libfoo6g
> situation??
i explained this elsewhere...
Why don't we put the libs in a differen
I got sick of listening to people discuss the gcc 3.2 transition in an
uninformed manner. So I've whipped up a transition plan which will
hopefully get us from A to B without causing too much pain. Haha.
I'm entirely fallible and I don't pretend to understand all the issues
involved with doing t
On Thu, May 09, 2002 at 05:01:32PM -0400, Christopher C. Chimelis wrote:
>
> On Thu, 9 May 2002, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
>
> > Yep, I managed to cross-build everything to alpha from x86 and then it
> > even compiled itself a few times. it was only trying to compile some
>
On Thu, May 09, 2002 at 04:38:31PM -0400, Christopher C. Chimelis wrote:
> FYI, I'm getting MUCH farther using Matthias' new gcc-3.1 pre packages as
> the native compiler for i386 building the cross compiler for alpha. I
> suspect that 2.95.4 may have issues with building 32->64 cross compilers
>
On Tue, May 07, 2002 at 01:38:22PM +0100, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Monday 06 May 2002 20:35, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > I guess I'll try mips, mipsel & s390 next -- sparc & powerpc should be
> > able to bootstrap themselves without additional effort.
>
> I&#
On Tue, May 07, 2002 at 12:57:23PM +0100, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> No problem -- I've scripted it ;-)
Here is that script, for the curious:
#!/bin/sh
# How to build a Native Ada Compiler for your architecture
#
FULL_ARCH=m68k-li
On Monday 06 May 2002 20:35, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> I guess I'll try mips, mipsel & s390 next -- sparc & powerpc should be
> able to bootstrap themselves without additional effort.
I'm told s390 is already done -- cool. Just finished mipsel; it's
installed on repeat
On Tue, May 07, 2002 at 12:51:58AM -0400, Christopher C. Chimelis wrote:
>
> On Mon, 6 May 2002, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
>
> > and similar for m68k. Alpha appears to build, but once I try a native
> > make bootstrap, I get a segmentation fault:
>
> Hmmm...I may be ma
I've tried building m68k-linux, arm-linux and alpha-linux gnat compilers.
None has worked ;-( ARM and m68k seem to be missing some exception handling
support, eg (arm):
../../xgcc -B../../ -c -DCROSS_COMPILE -DIN_GCC `echo -g -O2
-fomit-frame-pointer -fPIC -DIN_RTS |sed -e 's/-pedantic//g' -
I just bootstrapped gcc (GCC) 3.1 20020503 (prerelease) on ia64 with Ada.
You can use it by logging into merulo.debian.org and setting your PATH to
/home/willy/gnu/bin:$PATH I got into trouble for using /usr/local/bin
last time, so I've hidden it in my home directory this time ;-)
Anyone want me
On Fri, Apr 26, 2002 at 07:36:47PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
> Did you try building the gnat compiler with native built compiler?
I did a make bootstrap which uses the compiler itself for the second
and third stages ...
--
Revolutions do not require corporate support.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, em
Hi, I just bootstrapped gnat on hppa using the gcc-3.1-20020423 release
candidate available from gcc.gnu.org. No Debian-specific patches applied.
What I don't know is how to Make Things Happen from here so that gnat
will be built in a future gcc-3.1 package.
Anyone who wants to pick up the nativ
Package: g++-2.95
Version: 2:2.95.4-8
Severity: important
Just looking randomly at build logs and noticed an internal compiler error
here:
http://buildd.debian.org/fetch.php?&pkg=freefem&ver=3.5.5-2&arch=arm&stamp=1013015536&file=log&as=raw
g++ -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I. -I../.. -g -O2 -c femParse
The followup to #120333 indicates this is a bug with g++; is anyone
looking into this? i see no discussing on debian-gcc about it, but i'm
reluctant to simply reassign it to gcc.
--
Revolutions do not require corporate support.
On Wed, Oct 31, 2001 at 04:27:17PM -0800, Jim Wilson wrote:
> extern inline means emit this function inline if you can, otherwise emit
> nothing. Since gcc makes no promise that it will inline any function, it
> is inherently unsafe to put extern inline in a C file. There is no guarantee
> that i
On Sun, Aug 19, 2001 at 12:07:27PM +0200, Reinhard Gimbel wrote:
> After successfully installing palinux-0.9.2 on my 715/64
> I'm looking for the compilers (c, c++) ...
It looks like you didn't add the debian apt sources to your
/etc/apt/sources.list. binutils is at 2.11.90.0.27-1 currently,
for
On Mon, Apr 30, 2001 at 11:09:29PM -0400, Christopher C. Chimelis wrote:
> Out of curiosity, how is binutils doing on hppa? I'm trying to look out
> for patches that would be needed (thank goodness IA64 hasn't hounded me
> lately...they've had TONS of patches :-P).
Well, we _were_ fine. Then amo
29 matches
Mail list logo
