gcc-4.3_4.3.3-15_i386.changes uploaded successfully to localhost
along with the files:
gcc-4.3_4.3.3-15.dsc
gcc-4.3_4.3.3-15.diff.gz
gcc-4.3-source_4.3.3-15_all.deb
libstdc++6-4.3-doc_4.3.3-15_all.deb
gcc-4.3-locales_4.3.3-15_all.deb
gcc-4.3-base_4.3.3-15_i386.deb
cpp-4.3_4.3.3-15_i38
Accepted:
cpp-4.3_4.3.3-15_i386.deb
to pool/main/g/gcc-4.3/cpp-4.3_4.3.3-15_i386.deb
g++-4.3-multilib_4.3.3-15_i386.deb
to pool/main/g/gcc-4.3/g++-4.3-multilib_4.3.3-15_i386.deb
g++-4.3_4.3.3-15_i386.deb
to pool/main/g/gcc-4.3/g++-4.3_4.3.3-15_i386.deb
gcc-4.3-base_4.3.3-15_i386.deb
to poo
Your message dated Wed, 29 Jul 2009 11:47:28 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#522562: fixed in gcc-4.3 4.3.3-15
has caused the Debian Bug report #522562,
regarding gcc-4.3: DEB_CROSS_NO_BIARCH cross compilers FTBFS on s390
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the proble
On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 03:08:25PM -0400, Nigel Croxon wrote:
> What needs to be done here?
>
These bugs are about the /emul/ia32-linux transition, which moves files
from the non-standard path /emul/ia32-linux to a more standard one
/lib32 (same as on Ubuntu).
The files that where previously in
LAST_UPDATED: Mon Jul 27 23:16:21 UTC 2009 (revision 150136)
Target: i486-linux-gnu
gcc version 4.3.3 (Debian 4.3.3-15)
Native configuration is i486-pc-linux-gnu
=== g++ tests ===
Running target unix
=== g++ Summary for unix ===
# of expected passes
--- Comment #8 from jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-29 22:37 ---
Is comment #5 meant to be a claim that the patch does not fully fix the bug?
If so, please state with what revision on what target the problem is still
observed.
In any case, the targets mentioned are not primary or s
--
jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Target Milestone|--- |4.5.0
http://gcc.g
--
jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
Target Milestone|--- |4.4.2
http://gcc.g
--
jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
Target Milestone|--- |4.4.2
http://gcc.g
--- Comment #9 from joel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-30 01:29 ---
(In reply to comment #8)
> Is comment #5 meant to be a claim that the patch does not fully fix the bug?
> If so, please state with what revision on what target the problem is still
> observed.
No. I reported this inde
10 matches
Mail list logo