Re: getting gcc for hppa into the archive

On Mon, Apr 30, 2001 at 11:09:29PM -0400, Christopher C. Chimelis wrote: > Out of curiosity, how is binutils doing on hppa? I'm trying to look out > for patches that would be needed (thank goodness IA64 hasn't hounded me > lately...they've had TONS of patches :-P). Well, we _were_ fine. Then amo

Re: getting gcc for hppa into the archive

On Tue, 1 May 2001, Matthias Klose wrote: > > In addition to needing hppa gcc debs I also need to do hppa64 cross > compiler > > debs(mostly for building 64bit kernels). I am hoping to use the GCC_TARGET > > environment variable thing in the 3.0 package but haven't started working > on >

Re: getting gcc for hppa into the archive

Matt Taggart writes: > > > 2.) Do a general gcc-3.1 based on the upstream 3.1 branch. Teach > > > gcc-defaults to use 3.1 for hppa. > > minor > > You're saying the gcc-defaults work is minor or the gcc-3.1 package? modifying the defaults work. > > Assuming that 3.0 stabilizes in the near

Bug#95800: upgrade is broken

reassign 95800 libdb2 thanks > "Matthias" == Matthias Klose <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> Apparently a predepends should fix this (Sorry, I can't >> remember what package, probably was libc6 which hasn't been >> installed yet). Matthias> - libc6-2.2.2 has been installed, so

Processed: Re: Bug#95800: upgrade is broken

Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > reassign 95800 libdb2 Bug#95800: upgrade is broken Bug reassigned from package `libstdc++2.10-dev' to `libdb2'. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Darren Benham (administrator, Debian Bugs database)

Re: Processed: Re: Bug#95800: upgrade is broken

On Mon, Apr 30, 2001 at 06:09:40PM -0500, Debian Bug Tracking System wrote: > Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > > > reassign 95800 libdb2 > Bug#95800: upgrade is broken > Bug reassigned from package `libstdc++2.10-dev' to `libdb2'. This is fixed with glibc 2.2.3-1 -- ---

Re: getting gcc for hppa into the archive

Matthias Klose writes... > for my understanding: these are backports of the hppa 3.1 checkins to > 3.0, or complete diffs from 3.0 to 3.1 including the hppa patches? The hppa CVS tree is still based on the 3.0 branch. When the changes were submitted upstream it was to late for them go into 3.0

getting gcc for hppa into the archive

Matt Taggart writes: > At this point I think the toolchain has stablized enough that I'd like to > get > proper debs into the archive. All of our diffs have been accepted by > upstream > but on the 3.1 branch. IMHO the diffs are too large to just add to the > current > 3.0 package. So

Bug#95358: gpc-2.95 error in prerm

On Thu, Apr 26, 2001 at 08:59:29PM +0200, Laurent Bonnaud wrote: > > Hi, > > sorry I made a mistake in my original report because I found another > bug while writing the report. The missing -r option is in > /var/lib/dpkg/info/gpc-2.95.preinst : > > # dpkg cannot handle transistions from symlin

Bug#95800: upgrade is broken

On Mon, Apr 30, 2001 at 11:22:36AM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote: > Brian May writes: > > Package: libstdc++2.10-dev > > Version: 1:2.95.2-13 > > Severity: grave > > > > Preparing to replace libstdc++2.10-dev 1:2.95.2-13 (using > .../libstdc++2.10-dev_1%3a2.95.4-0.010424_i386.deb) ... > > per

getting gcc for hppa into the archive

Hi debian-gcc, For a few months I have been producing gcc debs for the hppa port. Up to this point, - these debs have just resided on the hppa port ftp site and have not been in the proper debian archive - hppa-linux support has only been in the hppa port CVS, not yet merged upstream - the deb

gcc-3.0_3.0.ds5-0pre010427_sparc.changes INSTALLED

Installing: libobjc1_3.0-0pre010427_sparc.deb to pool/main/g/gcc-3.0/libobjc1_3.0-0pre010427_sparc.deb gcc-3.0_3.0.ds5-0pre010427.dsc to pool/main/g/gcc-3.0/gcc-3.0_3.0.ds5-0pre010427.dsc gcj-3.0_3.0-0pre010427_sparc.deb to pool/main/g/gcc-3.0/gcj-3.0_3.0-0pre010427_sparc.deb gcc-3.0-base_3.

gcc-3.0 override disparity

There are disparities between your recently installed upload and the override file for the following file(s): gcc-3.0-base_3.0-0pre010427_all.deb: section is overridden from base to devel. gcc-3.0-base_3.0-0pre010427_all.deb: priority is overridden from required to standard. libgcc0_3.0-0pre01042

Bug#95800: upgrade is broken

Brian May writes: > Package: libstdc++2.10-dev > Version: 1:2.95.2-13 > Severity: grave > > Preparing to replace libstdc++2.10-dev 1:2.95.2-13 (using > .../libstdc++2.10-dev_1%3a2.95.4-0.010424_i386.deb) ... > perl: /lib/libc.so.6: version `GLIBC_2.2' not found (required by > /lib/libdb.

Bug#95812: gcc-3.0-doc: Dead link: /usr/share/doc/gcc-3.0-doc/gcc-3.0.info.gz

Package: gcc-3.0-doc Version: 1:3.0-0pre010403 Severity: normal Cruft tells me that /usr/share/doc/gcc-3.0-doc/gcc-3.0.info.gz is a symbolic link to: /usr/share/info/gcc-3.0.info.gz which does not exist. It should probably point to gcc-300.info.gz instead. That is unless it is gcc-300.info.gz

Bug#95800: upgrade is broken

Package: libstdc++2.10-dev Version: 1:2.95.2-13 Severity: grave Preparing to replace libstdc++2.10-dev 1:2.95.2-13 (using .../libstdc++2.10-dev_1%3a2.95.4-0.010424_i386.deb) ... perl: /lib/libc.so.6: version `GLIBC_2.2' not found (required by /lib/libdb.so.3) dpkg: warning - old pre-removal scri