Bug#999263: libcompface: diff for NMU version 1:1.5.2-5.1

Thanx! On Sat, Dec 25, 2021 at 6:21 PM gregor herrmann wrote: > Control: tags 861345 + pending > Control: tags 965632 + patch > Control: tags 965632 + pending > Control: tags 999263 + patch > Control: tags 999263 + pending > > > Dear maintainer, > > I've prepared an NMU for libcompface

Bug#1001273: Bug#932989: gcc-avr: Package version severely outdated compared to main gcc-toolchain

I believe your right, and I would support any such efforts. I've orphaned these packages quite some time ago as I've not been able to find the time to implement this myself though. On Thu, Dec 16, 2021 at 2:03 PM Gregor Riepl wrote: > > >> Switching back to use upstream source would be one

Bug#966898: binutils-avr: FTBFS: elf.c:706:35: error: overflow in conversion from ‘unsigned int’ to ‘int’ changes value from ‘num_group = 4294967295’ to ‘-1’ [-Werror=overflow]

Thanx for the investigation! I'll update the package. Yes something has to be done about what upstream distribution we use. Unfortunately there are atmel specific patches that people rely on that was not accepted upstream, so switching is not as straight forward as it might seem... On Mon, Aug

Bug#831174: gcc-avr: diff for NMU version 1:4.9.2+Atmel3.5.0-1.1

I'm releaseing my version now, which I suppose cancels the NMU? On Sun, Sep 25, 2016 at 12:36 PM, Sebastian Ramacher <sramac...@debian.org> wrote: > On 2016-09-25 10:40:34, Hakan Ardo wrote: > > Thanx. I've got a version on the way that instead applies this upstream >

Bug#831174: gcc-avr: diff for NMU version 1:4.9.2+Atmel3.5.0-1.1

Thanx. I've got a version on the way that instead applies this upstream fix for gcc 6 compatibility: https://gcc.gnu.org/git/?p=gcc.git;a=commitdiff;h=ec1cc0263f156f70693a62cf17b254a0029f4852 I would prefer to go with thatone unless you have strong reasons for your approach? On Sat, Sep 24,

Bug#833805: picon-domains: FTBFS when built with dpkg-buildpackage -A (binary build with no binary artifacts)

Thanx for the repport and fix. I'll apply it shortely... On Mon, Aug 8, 2016 at 11:21 PM, Santiago Vila wrote: > Hi. > > While we are at it: You might want to modernize debian/rules a little > bit. In particular, targets build-arch and build-indep are now > mandatory too (so

Bug#808114: avr-libc in Debian testing is incompatible with gcc-avr, linking fails

On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 9:22 AM, Paul Fertser <fercer...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hello, thank you for the prompt reply. > > On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 09:05:19AM +0100, Hakan Ardo wrote: > > Thanks, this is fixed in unstable. > > It is, but users of Debian testing right no

Bug#808114: avr-libc in Debian testing is incompatible with gcc-avr, linking fails

Thanks, this is fixed in unstable. Den 16 dec 2015 09:00 skrev "Paul Fertser" : > Package: avr-libc > Version: 1:1.8.0+Atmel3.4.5-1 > Severity: grave > > This current version depends on gcc-avr (>= 1:4.8.1+Atmel3.4.5), and > testing already ships 1:4.9.2+Atmel3.5.0-1 which

Bug#807502: gcc-avr: Missing support for atxmega

Hi, I've now uploaded a new version of avr-libc with the new names on those files. I'll also update binutils to declear that it wont work with older avr-libc. On Fri, Dec 11, 2015 at 7:56 PM, Hakan Ardo <ha...@debian.org> wrote: > Hi, > the file you want is crtx384d3.o and not crtat

Bug#807502: gcc-avr: Missing support for atxmega

Please do. It might be that we need to update avr-libc too? That work is in progress, but was delayed. Should be ready any day now... On Fri, Dec 11, 2015 at 3:57 PM, Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer < perezme...@gmail.com> wrote: > Then I would prefer to raise the severity to serious, are

Bug#807502: gcc-avr: Missing support for atxmega

Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer < perezme...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Friday 11 December 2015 16:15:52 Hakan Ardo wrote: > > Please do. > > Done, thanks! > > > It might be that we need to update avr-libc too? That work is in > > progress, but was delayed. Should

Bug#727117: binutils-avr: FTBFS on s390x - blocks testing migration

Hi, thanx for the report. I've made a few test builds on s390x now and it seems to build just fine, so I'm not sure what to do about this. I'm uploading a new version with other fixes now, and I'll dig more if this issue persists... On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 2:39 PM, Niels Thykier ni...@thykier.net

Bug#727117: Please retry building binutils-avr 2.23.1-1 on s390x

Hi, I've made a few test builds of binutils-avr 2.23.1-1 in a sid_s390x-dchroot chroot on zelenka.debian.org and they all worked just fine. gb binutils-avr_2.23.1-1 . s390x -- Håkan Ardö -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-rc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe.

Bug#725770: gcc-avr: Needs binutils-avr later than 2.20.1-3

Yes, your right. I'll update the dependency. Thanx for the report. On Tue, Oct 8, 2013 at 8:48 AM, Moritz Augsburger bug+deb...@moritz.augsburger.name wrote: Package: gcc-avr Version: 1:4.8-1 Severity: serious Justification: Policy 3.5 With binutils-avr 2.20.1-3 installed, I got pseudo

Bug#696397: gdb-avr: add Built-Using field

Thanx for the patch! I'll upgrade the package. On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 1:46 PM, Ansgar Burchardt ans...@debian.org wrote: Package: src:gdb-avr Version: 7.2-1 Severity: serious Tags: patch Usertags: built-using gdb-avr uses the gdb source from gdb-source, but does not indicate so with a

Bug#686173: ld segfaults when linking uncomforming ELF

Thanx! I'm uploading a new version binutils-avr with this patch. Please verify that it solves the problem. On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 5:54 PM, Scott Howard showard...@gmail.com wrote: owner 686173 submitter 686173 jack23...@hotmail.com reassign 686173 binutils-avr 2.20.1-2 severity 686173

Bug#645822: Sparc FTBFS is fixed by --disable-checking

Thanx, I'll apply and release as soon as I verified that it still builds on x86. On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 9:46 PM, Jurij Smakov ju...@wooyd.org wrote: Hello, I've just confirmed that gcc-avr builds successfully on sparc if --disable-checking is dropped from configure options. Best regards,

Bug#648612: Patches with incorrect paths

Are you saying that chunks with ./binutils works while chunks with ./gas does not? I've just tried to rebuild on a freshly update chroot and it works just fine. Might this be due to some issue with your system? On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 12:01 AM, Adam Baxter volta...@voltagex.org wrote: I'm not

Bug#594279: gcc-avr: non-standard gcc/g++ used for build (gcc-4.3)

Any chance of having it reintroduced? Latest upstream version is based on gcc 4.3.4. The avr backend of gcc is developed somewhat separated from main gcc and only synced occasionally. On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 12:39 PM, Julien Cristau jcris...@debian.org wrote: severity 594279 serious kthxbye

Bug#594279: gcc-avr: non-standard gcc/g++ used for build (gcc-4.3)

It's the gcc source tar archive. If avr-gcc is the only package still needing it, I suppose it would make sens to place it in the gcc-avr source package. On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 1:09 PM, Matthias Klose d...@debian.org wrote: On 31.03.2011 13:05, Hakan Ardo wrote: Any chance of having

Bug#554468: binutils-avr: Compile stop with incompatiblity problems

OK, I'm afraid that I've not got access to that source. But I've tried to compile a file test4.c containing: volatile int cnt; int main() { while (1) cnt++; return 0; } Using a similar commandline: avr-gcc -DMASTER -Wall -Wstrict-prototypes -g2 -Os -mmcu=atmega128 -mno-tablejump

Bug#554468: binutils-avr: Compile stop with incompatiblity problems

Hi, what are you trying to compile? On Wed, Nov 4, 2009 at 8:39 PM, Michael Ott mich...@king-coder.de wrote: Package: binutils-avr Version: 2.20-1 Severity: grave Justification: renders package unusable Compile PPS source code Get the following errors: avr-gcc -DMASTER -Wall

Bug#543016: Bug#518742: avr toolchain FTBFS

Hi, I'm working on it. The main problem is that I have to use the source from gcc-source and binutill-source packages, which are constantly changing and the avr specific patches have to be updated every time. There have been suggestions about using an exact version dependency on the source

Bug#534973: stable updates

I don't know, but I would agree that the risk is small enough to drop the matter and close the case. On Tue, Jul 7, 2009 at 7:09 AM, Michael S. Gilbertmichael.s.gilb...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, 6 Jul 2009 21:44:44 +0200 Thijs Kinkhorst wrote: version 1:1.5.2-5 that I released to unstable is

Bug#534973: stable updates

Hi, version 1:1.5.2-5 that I released to unstable is suitable for stable aswell. Prior to this bugfix unstable and stable both contained version 1:1.5.2-4. Attached is a patch with the fix. Do you want me to build it for stable aswell? On Sun, Jul 5, 2009 at 12:59 AM, Michael S.

Bug#534973: compface: bufer overflow in xbm-file

Hi, thx for the report. Attached is a patch fixing the buffer overflow. I'll prepare a new release tonight. On Sun, Jun 28, 2009 at 7:10 PM, metalho...@hushmail.com wrote: Subject: compface: bufer overflow in xbm-file Package: compface Version: 1:1.5.2-4 Severity: grave Justification: user

Bug#501424: gcc-avr

Hi, avr-gcc version 1:4.3.2-1 has been uploaded to unstable. It fixes bug #501424 by dissabling the patches that has been incoporated into gcc-4.3-source v 4.3.2-1which have propagated to lenny. I did not include an extra copy of the gcc src code in avr-gcc as people are conserned about the size

Bug#501424: gcc-avr: FTBFS in lenny: patching fails (again)

6Hi, this continuous changing of the src provided by gcc is starting to get tiresome :) I think we should include a copy of the gcc src in the avr-gcc src pkg and drop the src-dep on the gcc-src package. On Wed, Oct 8, 2008 at 6:54 PM, Tobias Klauser [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The patch

Bug#501424: just say no to bad ideas

6 On Wed, Oct 8, 2008 at 10:15 PM, Thomas Viehmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, this continuous changing of the src provided by gcc is starting to get tiresome :) I think we should include a copy of the gcc src in the avr-gcc src pkg and drop the src-dep on the gcc-src package. No. As a

Bug#493454: Easy fix

Thanx, I'll upload an update. On Sat, Aug 9, 2008 at 11:18 PM, Jurij Smakov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: tags 493454 patch thanks This is caused by a missing dependency on texlive-extra-utils, avr-libc uses epstopdf from this package during build. I'm not providing a trivial patch, confirmed

Bug#490310: Bug#491560: binutils-avr: downgrading to 2.18-3 works

Hi, the build problem of gcc-avr seems to be that a few of the patches I apply has now been applied to the src provided by gcc-src. To prevent this kind of problems in the future do you think it's a good idea to Build-Depend on an exact version of gcc-4.3-source? I tried something like that some

Bug#486844: avr-libc: FHS violation

Hi, no I think /usr/lib/avr is better. These are cross-compilation files, and should not be mixed with the native files. I have this fixed and will release as soon as I've done some more testing... On Sun, Jul 6, 2008 at 9:23 PM, Dmitry E. Oboukhov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: OK, where to? May be

Bug#486844: avr-libc: FHS violation

OK, where to? On Wed, Jun 18, 2008 at 4:49 PM, Bernd Zeimetz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Package: avr-libc Severity: serious According to the FHS, /usr/avr is not a valid directory, so your package is violating the Debian Policy 9.1.1. Please move the files somwhere else. Thanks, Bernd

Bug#474674: easy fix

Hi, thanx I was waiting for some patches that should have been released by now before doing a new release, but I guess it silly to wait any longer so I'll make a new release tonight... On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 9:55 AM, Marc =?UTF-8?Q?Poulhi=C3=A8s [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Simply change line:

Bug#474674: easy fix

Hi, I'm using: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2008-03/msg00847.html that patch will be included in 4.3.0-2 which I will release as soon as I've confirmed it's working (==today). On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 10:56 AM, Marc =?UTF-8?Q?Poulhi=C3=A8s [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hakan Ardo [EMAIL

Bug#474674: easy fix

Hi again, it seams like this was not enough. The winavr and freebsd maintainers have apparently been working on a 4.3 release with avr6 support for some time, but no release yet. I suppose we'll make another 4.3 release without avr6 in the meantime... On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 11:13 AM, Hakan Ardo

Bug#413216: gcc-avr includes GFL docs with cover texts and invariant sections

Hi, I'll have a look at this tonight. If Matthias solution works we'll use thatone for etch, and the gcc-src solution for unstable. Should I do anything special to make the release go into etch? On 3/19/07, Steve Langasek [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Håkan, Can you give an ETA for fixing this

Bug#413216: gcc-avr includes GFL docs with cover texts and invariant sections

Hi, thanx for the patch. A better solution however would be to build-depend on gcc-4.1-source in order not to duplicate the gcc sourcecode. On 3/13/07, Frank Küster [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Matthias Klose [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Package: gcc-avr Version: 1:4.1.0-1 Severity: serious see

Bug#413216: gcc-avr includes GFL docs with cover texts and invariant sections

On 3/13/07, Frank Küster [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hakan Ardo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, thanx for the patch. A better solution however would be to build-depend on gcc-4.1-source in order not to duplicate the gcc sourcecode. For sure this would be better. (I just didn't dare try this.) I

Bug#413216: gcc-avr includes GFL docs with cover texts and invariant sections

On 3/13/07, Steve Langasek [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, Mar 13, 2007 at 06:14:51PM +0100, Hakan Ardo wrote: On 3/13/07, Frank Küster [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hakan Ardo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, thanx for the patch. A better solution however would be to build-depend on gcc-4.1

Bug#392961: closed by Hakan Ardo [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bug#392961: fixed in gdb-avr 6.4-2)

On 11/1/06, Matthias Klose [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: * Added suggest gdb-doc (closes: #392961) This surely didn't remove the GFDL'ed texi files from the source as done in the gdb source package. Nope, I'll rectify that... -- Håkan Ardö

Bug#365288: xfaces: please update for X11R7

Hi, thanx for the patch, I'll apply it later today. On 4/29/06, Aaron M. Ucko [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Package: xfaces Version: 3.3-25 Severity: grave Tags: patch Justification: renders package unusable Greetings. As you may have heard, Debian is in the midst of a transition to X11R7. One

Bug#350644: Patch for NMU of gdb-avr

Hi, thanx for the fix, but the patch were missing... On 2/15/06, Luk Claes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Attached the patch for the version I uploaded. Please respond if you think that the attached patch won't work. Cheers Luk -- Luk Claes - http://people.debian.org/~luk - GPG key

Bug#349015: compface: no longer reads XBM files

Hi, thanx for all the pacthes, I'll make a new release during this weekend... On 2/3/06, Matej Vela [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: retitle 349015 compface: no longer reads XBM files tag 349015 patch thanks The Debian-specific patch that allowed compface(1) to read XBM images got lost between

Bug#346812: intent to upload sponsored NMU to fix xlibs-dev bug

Hi, thanx for the patch, I can do the upload today. On 1/18/06, Justin Pryzby [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: package xfaces tag 346812 patch thanks I intend to NMU a fix for this bug sponsored by some member of the QA group; patch attached. My pbuild result of this patch was clean, and produced

Bug#348326: compface: compface generates unjustified warnings

On 1/16/06, Didier Verna [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Package: compface Version: 1:1.5.2-1 Severity: grave Hi, since the last upgrade, compface doesn't do its job anymore, but generates unjustified warnings instead. Here is a testcase on the xbm file attached below (that looks ok to

Bug#341361: siptoolbox: libanimal-0.14.0.so.0 no longer availible

Package: siptoolbox Version: 0.3.99rc2alpha3-2 Severity: grave Justification: renders package unusable Hi, it is compiled agains libanimal-0.14.0.so.0, which is no longer availkible as animal0 is updated. Pleas recompile. -- System Information: Debian Release: 3.1 APT prefers unstable APT

Bug#297504: Can't build avr-libc from source

On Tue, Mar 08, 2005 at 06:39:41PM +0100, Santiago Vila wrote: My system is unstable as of today. Is there a missing build-depends: netpbm or something? Probably, I'll look into it... -- Hakan Ardo -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble