Bug#256770: Bug#204805: Intel have reproduced this 'bug'
tags 256770 confirmed thanks Hi, At Sat, 17 Jul 2004 18:50:42 +1000, Duraid Madina wrote: > #204805 is fixed now. Thanks for your quick reply. I close it now. > #256770 is a new bug. But the problem may not be > with the Intel compiler. Why are symbols multiply defined in libc.a?? It > seems a mistake. Yeah, that's right. I confirmed there're a lot of multiple symbol definition... I have no idea why duplicate symbols are existed. It needs investigation... Regards, -- gotom
Processed: Re: Bug#204805: Intel have reproduced this 'bug'
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > tags 256770 confirmed Bug#256770: libc6.1-dev: multiple definitions in libc.a (lc-ctype.o), breaks Intel compiler Tags were: experimental Tags added: confirmed > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database)
Bug#204805: Intel have reproduced this 'bug'
Hi Masanori, #204805 is fixed now. #256770 is a new bug. But the problem may not be with the Intel compiler. Why are symbols multiply defined in libc.a?? It seems a mistake. The Intel compiler works on RedHat and SuSE. Also, you can download the compiler for free, from this website: http://developer.intel.com/software/products/compilers/clin/noncom.htm (but you must register). Good luck! Duraid GOTO Masanori wrote: At Tue, 12 Aug 2003 06:40:11 +1000, Duraid Madina wrote: And they say that 'this problem is due to our compiler not supporting glibc 2.3 yet.' A fix is in the works, apparently. #204805 is reported in 2.3.2, but now we have 2.3.2.ds1. Is this bug still alive? BTW, there's two bugs about intel C/C++: #204805, #256770. Both bugs are reported by you. I guess the newer version fix #204805, but it's still broken (#256770). I wonder why debian glibc obstruct compilation with intel C/C++. Is it designed only for RedHat's glibc? Commercial applications are difficult to check because we cannot get easily. I know the speed difference between gcc and intel cc. It's currently different significantly in the high performance numerical computation. So it's valuable to investigate on Debian IA-64. Duraid, please check this bug more. Regards, -- gotom
Bug#204805: Intel have reproduced this 'bug'
At Tue, 12 Aug 2003 06:40:11 +1000, Duraid Madina wrote: > And they say that 'this problem is due to our compiler not supporting > glibc 2.3 yet.' > > A fix is in the works, apparently. #204805 is reported in 2.3.2, but now we have 2.3.2.ds1. Is this bug still alive? BTW, there's two bugs about intel C/C++: #204805, #256770. Both bugs are reported by you. I guess the newer version fix #204805, but it's still broken (#256770). I wonder why debian glibc obstruct compilation with intel C/C++. Is it designed only for RedHat's glibc? Commercial applications are difficult to check because we cannot get easily. I know the speed difference between gcc and intel cc. It's currently different significantly in the high performance numerical computation. So it's valuable to investigate on Debian IA-64. Duraid, please check this bug more. Regards, -- gotom
Bug#256770: Bug#204805: Intel have reproduced this 'bug'
tags 256770 confirmed thanks Hi, At Sat, 17 Jul 2004 18:50:42 +1000, Duraid Madina wrote: > #204805 is fixed now. Thanks for your quick reply. I close it now. > #256770 is a new bug. But the problem may not be > with the Intel compiler. Why are symbols multiply defined in libc.a?? It > seems a mistake. Yeah, that's right. I confirmed there're a lot of multiple symbol definition... I have no idea why duplicate symbols are existed. It needs investigation... Regards, -- gotom -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Processed: Re: Bug#204805: Intel have reproduced this 'bug'
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > tags 256770 confirmed Bug#256770: libc6.1-dev: multiple definitions in libc.a (lc-ctype.o), breaks Intel compiler Tags were: experimental Tags added: confirmed > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#204805: Intel have reproduced this 'bug'
Hi Masanori, #204805 is fixed now. #256770 is a new bug. But the problem may not be with the Intel compiler. Why are symbols multiply defined in libc.a?? It seems a mistake. The Intel compiler works on RedHat and SuSE. Also, you can download the compiler for free, from this website: http://developer.intel.com/software/products/compilers/clin/noncom.htm (but you must register). Good luck! Duraid GOTO Masanori wrote: At Tue, 12 Aug 2003 06:40:11 +1000, Duraid Madina wrote: And they say that 'this problem is due to our compiler not supporting glibc 2.3 yet.' A fix is in the works, apparently. #204805 is reported in 2.3.2, but now we have 2.3.2.ds1. Is this bug still alive? BTW, there's two bugs about intel C/C++: #204805, #256770. Both bugs are reported by you. I guess the newer version fix #204805, but it's still broken (#256770). I wonder why debian glibc obstruct compilation with intel C/C++. Is it designed only for RedHat's glibc? Commercial applications are difficult to check because we cannot get easily. I know the speed difference between gcc and intel cc. It's currently different significantly in the high performance numerical computation. So it's valuable to investigate on Debian IA-64. Duraid, please check this bug more. Regards, -- gotom -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#204805: Intel have reproduced this 'bug'
At Tue, 12 Aug 2003 06:40:11 +1000, Duraid Madina wrote: > And they say that 'this problem is due to our compiler not supporting > glibc 2.3 yet.' > > A fix is in the works, apparently. #204805 is reported in 2.3.2, but now we have 2.3.2.ds1. Is this bug still alive? BTW, there's two bugs about intel C/C++: #204805, #256770. Both bugs are reported by you. I guess the newer version fix #204805, but it's still broken (#256770). I wonder why debian glibc obstruct compilation with intel C/C++. Is it designed only for RedHat's glibc? Commercial applications are difficult to check because we cannot get easily. I know the speed difference between gcc and intel cc. It's currently different significantly in the high performance numerical computation. So it's valuable to investigate on Debian IA-64. Duraid, please check this bug more. Regards, -- gotom -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#204805: Intel have reproduced this 'bug'
And they say that 'this problem is due to our compiler not supporting glibc 2.3 yet.' A fix is in the works, apparently. Duraid -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
