On Fri, 9 Jan 2004, Matthias Klose wrote: > reassign 225039 pine > thanks > > It's not a bug. By default it is trying to build 64-bit, so it isn't > working. > > Either prepend "sparc32" to the command, or touch /etc/disable_64_gcc.
I don't fully understand, could you please elaborate? Why should someone do something special in order for things to work? Why does gcc not ship /etc/disable_64_gcc by default? If it's not a bug, why do you reassign it to pine instead of closing it? In which way it is a "pine non-bug" more than a "gcc non-bug"? How many packages are expected to fail in the same way? What makes pine special so that it fails but the other packages don't? (Please note that those are *not* rethorical questions, I think they reflect accurately the type of information I would like to have to understand this bug).