On Sun, Mar 7, 2010 at 19:19:25 +0100, Iustin Pop wrote: > Now, I'm not sure how to proceed here. I see that gcc-4.4 on armel is still > the > same (4.4.3-1) as when the build was attempted, so just re-attempting the > build > will not help… Any suggestions are welcome. > > If, one way or another, this cannot be fixed, should we remove armel from the > list of supported arches for this package? > That wouldn't be too nice for your reverse dependencies... I came across this while looking at what was preventing compiz from going to testing. Did this get reported to the gcc people, and/or arm porter list? Did anyone try to get a minimal test-case?
Cheers, Julien
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
