Hello,
Is anyone else seeing breakage of OpenOffice.org 1.0.1-5 after
updating gcc-3.2 to the latest 3.2.1-0pre2 from 20020912? I see
lots of errors of the form...
14922: /usr/lib/openoffice/program/libsal.so.3: error: relocation error:
undefined symbol: component_canUnload (fatal)
when I do
Greetings!
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (LaMont Jones) writes:
> On Fri, Sep 13, 2002 at 10:17:04AM -0400, Camm Maguire wrote:
> > Greetings! I think I may have stumbled on a possible explanation for
> > gcl's build failure on hppa. Hppa alone will not relocate (i.e. allow
> > dlopen to open) modules not
Your message dated Mon, 16 Sep 2002 08:40:36 -0400
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line libstdc++5-dev: not a bug
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 responsi
Your message dated Mon, 16 Sep 2002 03:17:29 -0400
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#160404: fixed in gcc-3.2 1:3.2.1ds1-0pre2
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
Your message dated Mon, 16 Sep 2002 03:17:29 -0400
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#160175: fixed in gcc-3.2 1:3.2.1ds1-0pre2
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
Your message dated Mon, 16 Sep 2002 03:17:28 -0400
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#159620: fixed in gcc-3.2 1:3.2.1ds1-0pre2
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
Your message dated Mon, 16 Sep 2002 03:17:28 -0400
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#159354: fixed in gcc-3.2 1:3.2.1ds1-0pre2
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
Your message dated Mon, 16 Sep 2002 03:17:28 -0400
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#158459: fixed in gcc-3.2 1:3.2.1ds1-0pre2
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
Accepted:
cpp-3.2_3.2.1-0pre2_sparc.deb
to pool/main/g/gcc-3.2/cpp-3.2_3.2.1-0pre2_sparc.deb
fastjar_3.2.1-0pre2_sparc.deb
to pool/main/g/gcc-3.2/fastjar_3.2.1-0pre2_sparc.deb
fixincludes_3.2.1-0pre2_sparc.deb
to pool/main/g/gcc-3.2/fixincludes_3.2.1-0pre2_sparc.deb
g++-3.2_3.2.1-0pre2_sparc
Accepted:
cpp-3.2_3.2.1-0pre2_hppa.deb
to pool/main/g/gcc-3.2/cpp-3.2_3.2.1-0pre2_hppa.deb
fastjar_3.2.1-0pre2_hppa.deb
to pool/main/g/gcc-3.2/fastjar_3.2.1-0pre2_hppa.deb
fixincludes_3.2.1-0pre2_hppa.deb
to pool/main/g/gcc-3.2/fixincludes_3.2.1-0pre2_hppa.deb
g++-3.2_3.2.1-0pre2_hppa.deb
Accepted:
cpp-3.2-doc_3.2.1-0pre2_all.deb
to pool/main/g/gcc-3.2/cpp-3.2-doc_3.2.1-0pre2_all.deb
cpp-3.2_3.2.1-0pre2_i386.deb
to pool/main/g/gcc-3.2/cpp-3.2_3.2.1-0pre2_i386.deb
fastjar_3.2.1-0pre2_i386.deb
to pool/main/g/gcc-3.2/fastjar_3.2.1-0pre2_i386.deb
fixincludes_3.2.1-0pre2_i386.deb
There are disparities between your recently accepted upload and the
override file for the following file(s):
libg2c0_3.2.1-0pre2_i386.deb: section is overridden from libs to devel.
Either the package or the override file is incorrect. If you think
the override is correct and the package wrong pl
Accepted:
cpp-3.2_3.2.1-0pre2_m68k.deb
to pool/main/g/gcc-3.2/cpp-3.2_3.2.1-0pre2_m68k.deb
fastjar_3.2.1-0pre2_m68k.deb
to pool/main/g/gcc-3.2/fastjar_3.2.1-0pre2_m68k.deb
fixincludes_3.2.1-0pre2_m68k.deb
to pool/main/g/gcc-3.2/fixincludes_3.2.1-0pre2_m68k.deb
g++-3.2_3.2.1-0pre2_m68k.deb
13 matches
Mail list logo