Accepted:
gcc-3.3-base_3.3-0pre0_i386.deb
to pool/main/g/gcc-3.3/gcc-3.3-base_3.3-0pre0_i386.deb
gcc-3.3_3.3ds0-0pre0.diff.gz
to pool/main/g/gcc-3.3/gcc-3.3_3.3ds0-0pre0.diff.gz
gcc-3.3_3.3ds0-0pre0.dsc
to pool/main/g/gcc-3.3/gcc-3.3_3.3ds0-0pre0.dsc
gcc-3.3_3.3ds0.orig.tar.gz
to pool/main
Matthias Klose <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Rumour says, that there will be one more C++ ABI change to fix bugs
> found after the gcc-3.2 release (maybe for gcc-3.4), and then the C++
> ABI will be stable ...
I believe this is a misprediction of the future. Here is my prediction:
1. The "core"
LAST_UPDATED: Sat Mar 1 11:59:00 UTC 2003
Native configuration is s390-ibm-linux-gnu
=== g++ tests ===
Running target unix
FAIL: g++.dg/compat/break/bitfield7 y_tst.o compile
UNRESOLVED: g++.dg/compat/break/bitfield7 x_tst.o-y_tst.o link
UNRESOLVED: g++.dg/compat/break/bitfiel
LAST_UPDATED: Sat Mar 1 11:59:00 UTC 2003
Native configuration is powerpc-unknown-linux-gnu
=== g++ tests ===
Running target unix
FAIL: g++.dg/compat/break/bitfield7 y_tst.o compile
UNRESOLVED: g++.dg/compat/break/bitfield7 x_tst.o-y_tst.o link
UNRESOLVED: g++.dg/compat/break/
LAST_UPDATED: Sat Mar 1 11:59:00 UTC 2003
Native configuration is hppa-unknown-linux-gnu
=== g++ tests ===
Running target unix
FAIL: g++.dg/compat/break/bitfield7 y_tst.o compile
UNRESOLVED: g++.dg/compat/break/bitfield7 x_tst.o-y_tst.o link
UNRESOLVED: g++.dg/compat/break/bit
LAST_UPDATED: Fri Feb 28 18:29:14 UTC 2003
Native configuration is s390-ibm-linux-gnu
=== g++ tests ===
Running target unix
FAIL: g++.eh/terminate2.C Execution test
XPASS: g++.other/init5.C Execution test
=== g++ Summary ===
# of expected passes73
LAST_UPDATED: Sat Mar 1 11:59:00 UTC 2003
Native configuration is alpha-unknown-linux-gnu
=== libjava tests ===
Running target unix
FAIL: initexc execution - gij test
FAIL: initexc execution - gij test
=== libjava Summary ===
# of expected passes29
LAST_UPDATED: Fri Feb 28 18:29:14 UTC 2003
Native configuration is mips-unknown-linux-gnu
=== g++ tests ===
Running target unix
FAIL: g++.dg/debug/debug4.C (test for excess errors)
FAIL: g++.dg/debug/debug4.C (test for excess errors)
FAIL: g++.dg/debug/debug4.C (test for excess
LAST_UPDATED: Fri Feb 28 18:29:14 UTC 2003
Native configuration is mipsel-unknown-linux-gnu
=== g++ tests ===
Running target unix
FAIL: g++.dg/debug/debug4.C (test for excess errors)
FAIL: g++.dg/debug/debug4.C (test for excess errors)
FAIL: g++.dg/debug/debug4.C (test for exces
devel
Changes: gcc-experimental (20030302-1) experimental; urgency=low
.
* CVS 20030302, taken from the HEAD branch.
* Add patch from gcc-3_1-branch to build gnat on powerpc.
* Disbable objc-gc.
* Build treelang.
Announcing to debian-devel-changes@lists.debian.org
Your package contain
-- Forwarded Message --
Subject: gcc-3.3_3.3ds0-0pre0_s390.changes is NEW
Date: Sun, 02 Mar 2003 13:17:23 -0500
From: Debian Installer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(new) cpp-3.3-doc_3.3-0pre0_all.deb optional doc
Documentation for the GNU C preprocessor (cpp)
Doc
Florian Weimer writes:
> Matthew Wilcox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > On Sun, Mar 02, 2003 at 11:33:18AM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote:
> >> Please drop shared library support altogether. It is currently not
> >> worth the trouble. GNAT ABIs change from version to version, and the
> >> run-tim
(new) gcc-3.3-base_3.3-0pre0_i386.deb optional devel
The GNU Compiler Collection (base package)
This package contains files common to all languages and libraries
contained in the GNU Compiler Collection (GCC).
.
This version of GCC is not yet available for this architecture.
Please use the com
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jérôme Marant) writes:
> Florian, I don't agree. I understand your arguments but honestly,
> there is no more than one ACT release per year. So people don't
> have to often rebuilt their programs and libraries.
I've looked at a few packages which would need DSOs and I came to t
Matthew Wilcox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sun, Mar 02, 2003 at 11:33:18AM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote:
>> Please drop shared library support altogether. It is currently not
>> worth the trouble. GNAT ABIs change from version to version, and the
>> run-time library can be built only with th
On Sun, Mar 02, 2003 at 11:33:18AM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote:
> Please drop shared library support altogether. It is currently not
> worth the trouble. GNAT ABIs change from version to version, and the
> run-time library can be built only with the corresponding version of
> the compiler. This
Florian Weimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'm going to recompile the existing Ada packages in Debian using GNAT
> 3.15p, at least on x86.
>
> This involves the following steps:
>
> - Packaging GNAT 3.15p (mostly done). I'm going to omit DSO support
> (see below).
>
> - Fixing the FTBFS
Thanks for your work on GNAT. It will be good to have it being maintained on
Debian again.
> I don't see a significant number of small Ada programs in Debian.
True. However there are a significant number of people who do development of
small programs using Debian and who sometimes distribute them
Miah Gregory <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> This concerns me a little. It seems to my untrained eye that this change
> would mean that we're sacrificing large amounts of space in packages
> compiled with GNAT, just to save rebuilding those packages when a new
> version of GNAT is uploaded? Given th
I'm going to recompile the existing Ada packages in Debian using GNAT
3.15p, at least on x86.
This involves the following steps:
- Packaging GNAT 3.15p (mostly done). I'm going to omit DSO support
(see below).
- Fixing the FTBFS errors of current Ada packages (not necessarily
3.15p-
Greetings! Just a followup note to say that I've reconfirmed this
problem, and have a gdb trace. All is well with 2.95 -O6
-fomit-frame-pointer, but the following happens with gcc-3.2 with -O2
or greater: (For the time being, GCL lowers its gcc optimization to -O
when using powerpc and >=gcc-3.
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Matthias Klose <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Florian Weimer writes:
> > Please drop shared library support altogether. It is currently not
> > worth the trouble. GNAT ABIs change from version to version, and the
> > run-time library can be built only with
Florian Weimer writes:
> Please drop shared library support altogether. It is currently not
> worth the trouble. GNAT ABIs change from version to version, and the
> run-time library can be built only with the corresponding version of
> the compiler. This means that a lot of work is required each
Matthew Wilcox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I confess to having made an omission when drawing up the gcc-3.2
> transition plan. I concentrated on C++ and completely ignored other
> languages. I do not know what (if anything) nees to be done for Java
> or Fortran. However, I've done a small amo
Matthew Wilcox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Second problem: dependencies in the debian/control file. They probably
> look something like this:
>
> Build-Depends: gnat (>= 3.14p-1), gnat (<< 3.15)
> and
> Depends: gnat (>= 3.14p-1), gnat (<< 3.15)
>
> What should these look like? I'm tempte
On Sun, Mar 02, 2003 at 09:36:17AM +, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> Second problem: dependencies in the debian/control file. They probably
> look something like this:
>
> Build-Depends: gnat (>= 3.14p-1), gnat (<< 3.15)
> and
> Depends: gnat (>= 3.14p-1), gnat (<< 3.15)
>
> What should these l
I do not know texinfo, and looking at that example (it's actually,
gcc/java/gcj.texi) has frightened me. A shorter example would probably
help much more, but really, I was only looking for a man page as I was
trying to see what all the programs on my system were for. Learning
texinfo right now is j
I confess to having made an omission when drawing up the gcc-3.2
transition plan. I concentrated on C++ and completely ignored other
languages. I do not know what (if anything) nees to be done for Java
or Fortran. However, I've done a small amount of investigation on
what needs to be done for A
LAST_UPDATED: Sat Mar 1 20:42:55 UTC 2003
Native configuration is i386-pc-linux-gnu
=== g++ tests ===
Running target unix
FAIL: g++.dg/warn/Wunused-2.C (test for warnings, line 5)
XPASS: g++.other/init5.C Execution test
=== g++ Summary ===
# of expected pass
> In reference to a message from Matthias Klose, dated Mar 01:
> > Matthias Klose writes:
> > > AFAIK the transition from 3.2 to 3.3 requires recompilation of C++
> > > code due to the changed exception handling (now DWARF2 based). As
> > > libstdc++ in 3.2 and 3.2 have the same soname, how to hand
30 matches
Mail list logo
