Your message dated Sat, 9 Oct 2004 08:42:06 +0200
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#275569: please make gcc dependent on libc6-dev
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am
talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration
somewhere. Please contact me immediately.)
Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)
--------------------------------------
Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 8 Oct 2004 21:11:41 +0000
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Oct 08 14:11:41 2004
Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from rtr.skawsoft.com.pl (localhost.localdomain) [213.25.37.67]
by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian))
id 1CG21Z-00010U-00; Fri, 08 Oct 2004 14:11:40 -0700
Received: by localhost.localdomain (Postfix, from userid 1000)
id ED2853BAFF; Fri, 8 Oct 2004 23:10:59 +0200 (CEST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Bartosz Fenski aka fEnIo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Debian Bug Tracking System <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: please make gcc dependent on libc6-dev
X-Mailer: reportbug 2.99.5
Date: Fri, 08 Oct 2004 23:10:59 +0200
Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_03_25
(1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-8.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_PACKAGE
autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_03_25
X-Spam-Level:
Package: gcc
Version: 4:3.3.4-3
Severity: wishlist
Hello dear gcc developers!
May I ask you why gcc doesn't depend on libc6-dev?
Why does it "only" recommend it?
More and more newbies still ask "why do I get :
checking for C compiler default output... configure: error: C compiler
cannot create executables"
That's pretty annoying when the same question still repeats on the mailing
lists and newsgroups.
How many applications could be compiled without libc6-dev?
I think that if someone type `apt-get install gcc` he/she should get full
working C compiler. I can't name our gcc full working if it is shipped
without libc6.
regards
fEnIo
-- System Information:
Debian Release: 3.1
APT prefers unstable
APT policy: (500, 'unstable')
Architecture: i386 (i686)
Kernel: Linux 2.4.27-1-686
Locale: LANG=pl_PL, LC_CTYPE=pl_PL
Versions of packages gcc depends on:
ii cpp 4:3.3.4-3 The GNU C preprocessor (cpp)
ii cpp-3.3 1:3.3.4-13 The GNU C preprocessor
ii gcc-3.3 1:3.3.4-13 The GNU C compiler
-- no debconf information
---------------------------------------
Received: (at 275569-done) by bugs.debian.org; 9 Oct 2004 06:42:10 +0000
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Oct 08 23:42:09 2004
Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from mail.cs.tu-berlin.de [130.149.17.13] (root)
by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian))
id 1CGAvh-0006ah-00; Fri, 08 Oct 2004 23:42:09 -0700
Received: from mailhost.cs.tu-berlin.de ([EMAIL PROTECTED] [130.149.17.13])
by mail.cs.tu-berlin.de (8.9.3p2/8.9.3) with ESMTP id IAA20433;
Sat, 9 Oct 2004 08:42:07 +0200 (MEST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by mailhost.cs.tu-berlin.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 06325F219;
Sat, 9 Oct 2004 08:42:07 +0200 (MEST)
Received: from mailhost.cs.tu-berlin.de ([127.0.0.1])
by localhost (bueno [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10224) with ESMTP
id 19438-01; Sat, 9 Oct 2004 08:42:06 +0200 (MEST)
Received: from bolero.cs.tu-berlin.de (bolero.cs.tu-berlin.de [130.149.19.1])
by mailhost.cs.tu-berlin.de (Postfix) with ESMTP;
Sat, 9 Oct 2004 08:42:06 +0200 (MEST)
Received: (from [EMAIL PROTECTED])
by bolero.cs.tu-berlin.de (8.12.10+Sun/8.12.8/Submit) id i996g6k1013985;
Sat, 9 Oct 2004 08:42:06 +0200 (MEST)
From: Matthias Klose <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sat, 9 Oct 2004 08:42:06 +0200
To: Bartosz Fenski aka fEnIo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Bug#275569: please make gcc dependent on libc6-dev
In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
X-Mailer: VM 7.03 under 21.4 (patch 6) "Common Lisp" XEmacs Lucid
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at cs.tu-berlin.de
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_03_25
(1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_BUG_NUMBER
autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_03_25
X-Spam-Level:
Bartosz Fenski aka fEnIo writes:
> Package: gcc
> Version: 4:3.3.4-3
> Severity: wishlist
>
> Hello dear gcc developers!
>
> May I ask you why gcc doesn't depend on libc6-dev?
> Why does it "only" recommend it?
>
> More and more newbies still ask "why do I get :
>
> checking for C compiler default output... configure: error: C compiler
> cannot create executables"
>
> That's pretty annoying when the same question still repeats on the mailing
> lists and newsgroups.
>
> How many applications could be compiled without libc6-dev?
>
> I think that if someone type `apt-get install gcc` he/she should get full
> working C compiler. I can't name our gcc full working if it is shipped
> without libc6.
you mention it, it's not needed for all tasks. There is a meta package
called build-essential which depends on all the needed packages.
