> maybe if linking with static libraries is an option?
i guess that's always possible, but kinda ugly.
randolph
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Fri, Apr 26, 2002 at 11:03:59PM +0200, Paul Seelig wrote:
> > Will someone please take responsibility for this [EMAIL PROTECTED]@# bug!
> >
> We take patches, you know?
Fine; line 5 of gij-3.0.postinst should end in || true.
> Just like /bin/rm could easily be used to delete the kernel. Tha
>Submitter-Id: net
>Originator:MadCoder
>Organization:
>Confidential: no
>Synopsis: Error of compilation of GCJ-3.0 (debian gcj-3.0.4-5
>Severity: critical
>Priority: medium
>Category: java
>Class: wrong-code
>Release: 3.0.4 (Debian testing/unstable)
>Envi
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> reassign 144602 g77
Bug#144602: lapack-dev: cannot link on alpha
Bug reassigned from package `lapack-dev' to `g77'.
> thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator,
On Fri, Apr 26, 2002 at 03:04:09PM -0500, David Starner wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 26, 2002 at 09:27:30PM +0200, J.H.M. Dassen (Ray) wrote:
> > If you as a system administrator delete files belonging to a package, be it
> > through rm, localepurge or vi /dev/hda, you have no right to expect the
> > packa
Accepted:
gcc-snapshot_20020426-1_hppa.deb
to pool/main/g/gcc-snapshot/gcc-snapshot_20020426-1_hppa.deb
Thank you for your contribution to Debian.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Fri, Apr 26, 2002 at 01:57:24PM -0500, David Starner wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 26, 2002 at 06:48:10AM -0500, Debian Bug Tracking System wrote:
> > This is a case of "don't do that then" which has been discussed at length
> > before:
> > http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=139796&repeatme
Accepted:
gcc-snapshot_20020426-1.diff.gz
to pool/main/g/gcc-snapshot/gcc-snapshot_20020426-1.diff.gz
gcc-snapshot_20020426-1.dsc
to pool/main/g/gcc-snapshot/gcc-snapshot_20020426-1.dsc
gcc-snapshot_20020426-1_i386.deb
to pool/main/g/gcc-snapshot/gcc-snapshot_20020426-1_i386.deb
gcc-snapshot
On Fri, Apr 26, 2002 at 09:27:30PM +0200, J.H.M. Dassen (Ray) wrote:
> > These users are using localepurge in the exact way the instructions say
> > to.
>
> And now they're sufficiently warned IMHO.
So you can fix a critical bug by adding a warning to the package? Why
did we add a Conflicts: tag,
On Fri, Apr 26, 2002 at 13:57:24 -0500, David Starner wrote:
> Will someone please take responsibility for this [EMAIL PROTECTED]@# bug!
The localepurge maintainer has taken responsibility for this problem by
extending it's description with the following note:
: Please note, that this tool is a ha
Randolph Chung writes:
> > Is that one available somewhere on an ia64 box, preferably one accessible
> > to John?
>
> gcc-snapshot package, but we cannot use that to build binaries to go into the
> archive (uses different library versions)
maybe if linking with static libraries is an option?
> I
On Fri, Apr 26, 2002 at 06:48:10AM -0500, Debian Bug Tracking System wrote:
> This is a case of "don't do that then" which has been discussed at length
> before:
> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=139796&repeatmerged=yes
>
> I'm closing this bug report.
Will someone please take re
On Fri, Apr 26, 2002 at 07:36:47PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
> Did you try building the gnat compiler with native built compiler?
I did a make bootstrap which uses the compiler itself for the second
and third stages ...
--
Revolutions do not require corporate support.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, em
I tried to build Ada with your binaries. The bootstrap fails with:
../../xgcc -B../../ -c -g -O2 -fPIC -DELF=1 -DLINUX=1 -mdisable-indexing -W
-Wall -gnatpg -I. -I/home/doko/gcc/3.1/gcc-3.1-3.1ds0/src/gcc/ada g-expect.adb
g-expect.adb: In function `gnat__expect__expect':
g-expect.adb:296: insn d
> Is that one available somewhere on an ia64 box, preferably one accessible
> to John?
gcc-snapshot package, but we cannot use that to build binaries to go into the
archive (uses different library versions)
I'm not sure which box John has access to, but mail
[EMAIL PROTECTED] and they can install
> > There appear to (still) be some issues with g++-3.0 on ia64. Under some
> > optimisation switches, the executable is built, but segfaults. Under others,
> > g++-3.-0 dies.
>
> fwiw with gcc version 3.1 20020331 (prerelease) the problem appears to
> be fixed. I think this might be the same/re
Your message dated Fri, 26 Apr 2002 13:47:13 +0200
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#144605: gij-3.0: Does not install
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 y
Package: gij-3.0
Version: 1:3.0.4-7
Severity: important
~> sudo apt-get install gij-3.0
Reading Package Lists... Done
Building Dependency Tree... Done
The following NEW packages will be installed:
gij-3.0
0 packages upgraded, 1 newly installed, 0 to remove and 0 not upgraded.
Need to get 8398B
> There appear to (still) be some issues with g++-3.0 on ia64. Under some
> optimisation switches, the executable is built, but segfaults. Under others,
> g++-3.-0 dies.
fwiw with gcc version 3.1 20020331 (prerelease) the problem appears to
be fixed. I think this might be the same/related to pr/53
19 matches
Mail list logo
