Matthias Klose dixit:
>I think, setting the flag for the option to 0 as the default, and
>applying this for m68k only would be the second best option, provided
Right…
>that you cannot find out how to implement Mikael's suggestion.
… but I think I know, generally, how to do that.
(Have been deal
Am 23.08.2013 00:26, schrieb Thorsten Glaser:
> Matthias Klose dixit:
>
>> yes, I do reject this.
>
> I see. Would you please…
>
>>> “for the time being”? If so, would you accept a patch
>>> that just disables -fauto-inc-dec on m68k *always*,
>>> even in the cases where it doesn’t ICE? (one-line
Mikael Pettersson writes:
> > pr49847.diff is not applied yet even though it seems
> > to be clear =E2=80=93 I=E2=80=99ve prodded them again a month ago
> > and have not received any response yet; maybe just
> > nobody feels responsible?
>
> I was hoping for some gcc maintainer to speak up a
On Thu, 22 Aug 2013 22:26:51 + (UTC), Thorsten Glaser
wrote:
> Matthias Klose dixit:
>
> >yes, I do reject this.
>
> I see. Would you please=E2=80=A6
>
> >> =E2=80=9Cfor the time being=E2=80=9D? If so, would you accept a patch
> >> that just disables -fauto-inc-dec on m68k *always*,
> >> e
On Wed, 21 Aug 2013 23:11:34 + (UTC), Thorsten Glaser
wrote:
> Matthias Klose dixit:
>
> >Which of these are applied upstream, and if not, why?
>
> libffi-m68k.diff is applied.
>
> m68k-revert-pr45144.diff is not applied upstream yet,
> maybe Mikael knows why?
This revert fixed miscompila
Matthias Klose dixit:
>yes, I do reject this.
I see. Would you please…
>> “for the time being”? If so, would you accept a patch
>> that just disables -fauto-inc-dec on m68k *always*,
>> even in the cases where it doesn’t ICE? (one-liner)
answer whether this would be considerable? (Untested,
but
Am 22.08.2013 21:32, schrieb Thorsten Glaser:
> Hi!
>
> Despite mentioning PR52306 in the changelog (as I did)
> you seem to have rejected pr52306-retry-hack.diff which
> is a bit unfortunate as we really need a workaround for
> that ICE to build some things in the archive, e.g. Qt4,
> Qt5 and any
Hi!
Despite mentioning PR52306 in the changelog (as I did)
you seem to have rejected pr52306-retry-hack.diff which
is a bit unfortunate as we really need a workaround for
that ICE to build some things in the archive, e.g. Qt4,
Qt5 and anything using it, mcabber, etc.
Do you outright reject this p
Matthias Klose dixit:
>Which of these are applied upstream, and if not, why?
libffi-m68k.diff is applied.
m68k-revert-pr45144.diff is not applied upstream yet,
maybe Mikael knows why?
pr49847.diff is not applied yet even though it seems
to be clear – I’ve prodded them again a month ago
and have
Am 17.08.2013 22:52, schrieb Thorsten Glaser:
> tags 711558 + patch
> thanks
>
> Hi,
>
> this should do the trick, already tested the bugfix with
> a cross-compiler.
>
> Building src:gcc-4.8 on wheezy needs the -d dpkg-buildpackage
> option though because the libcloog-isl-dev version is not
> lo
tags 711558 + patch
thanks
Hi,
this should do the trick, already tested the bugfix with
a cross-compiler.
Building src:gcc-4.8 on wheezy needs the -d dpkg-buildpackage
option though because the libcloog-isl-dev version is not
lowered down to 0.17 in wheezy (it does build and work with
-d though)
11 matches
Mail list logo
