Accepted:
cpp-3.3_3.3.2-0pre3_hppa.deb
to pool/main/g/gcc-3.3/cpp-3.3_3.3.2-0pre3_hppa.deb
fastjar_3.3.2-0pre3_hppa.deb
to pool/main/g/gcc-3.3/fastjar_3.3.2-0pre3_hppa.deb
fixincludes_3.3.2-0pre3_hppa.deb
to pool/main/g/gcc-3.3/fixincludes_3.3.2-0pre3_hppa.deb
g++-3.3_3.3.2-0pre3_hppa.deb
Accepted:
cpp-3.3-doc_3.3.2-0pre3_all.deb
to pool/main/g/gcc-3.3/cpp-3.3-doc_3.3.2-0pre3_all.deb
cpp-3.3_3.3.2-0pre3_i386.deb
to pool/main/g/gcc-3.3/cpp-3.3_3.3.2-0pre3_i386.deb
fastjar_3.3.2-0pre3_i386.deb
to pool/main/g/gcc-3.3/fastjar_3.3.2-0pre3_i386.deb
fixincludes_3.3.2-0pre3_i386.deb
There are disparities between your recently accepted upload and the
override file for the following file(s):
libgcc1_3.3.2-0pre3_i386.deb: package says priority is important, override says
required.
libstdc++5_3.3.2-0pre3_i386.deb: package says priority is important, override
says required.
Your message dated Tue, 09 Sep 2003 02:17:42 -0400
with message-id [EMAIL PROTECTED]
and subject line Bug#208717: fixed in gcc-3.3 1:3.3.2ds2-0pre3
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 Tue, 09 Sep 2003 02:17:42 -0400
with message-id [EMAIL PROTECTED]
and subject line Bug#207915: fixed in gcc-3.3 1:3.3.2ds2-0pre3
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
retitle 195509 RFP: g95 -- GNU Fortran 95
thanks
On Mon, Sep 08, 2003 at 09:55:27PM -0400, Adam C Powell IV wrote:
Thought this news might be of interest: g95 will be in gcc 3.5.
http://gcc-g95.sourceforge.net/ (scroll down to News/July 27)
I don't know whether this means the bug can be
Package: libstdc++5-3.3-dev
Version: 1:3.3.2-0pre2
Severity: normal
Tags: patch
-- System Information:
Debian Release: testing/unstable
Architecture: i386
Kernel: Linux kosh 2.4.21-5-k7 #1 Mon Aug 25 08:09:01 EST 2003 i686
Locale: LANG=C, LC_CTYPE=C
Versions of packages libstdc++5-3.3-dev
Package: cpp-3.2-doc
Version: 1:3.2.3-6
Severity: important
Justification: section 2.3.3
Your package does not comply with the policy as it does not provide
a proper extended descrition. Policy section 2.3.3 states:
The description should be written so that it gives the system
Package: g++-3.3
Version: 1:3.3.2-0pre2
Severity: important
Justification: section 2.3.3
Your package does not comply with the policy as it does not provide
a proper extended descrition. Policy section 2.3.3 states:
The description should be written so that it gives the system
Package: gcc-3.3-doc
Version: 1:3.3.1-0pre0
Severity: important
Justification: section 2.3.3
Your package does not comply with the policy as it does not provide
a proper extended descrition. Policy section 2.3.3 states:
The description should be written so that it gives the system
Package: gcc-3.2-doc
Version: 1:3.2.3-6
Severity: important
Justification: section 2.3.3
Your package does not comply with the policy as it does not provide
a proper extended descrition. Policy section 2.3.3 states:
The description should be written so that it gives the system
Package: g++-3.2
Version: 1:3.2.3-8
Severity: important
Justification: section 2.3.3
Your package does not comply with the policy as it does not provide
a proper extended descrition. Policy section 2.3.3 states:
The description should be written so that it gives the system
Package: g77-3.2-doc
Version: 1:3.2.3-6
Severity: important
Justification: section 2.3.3
Your package does not comply with the policy as it does not provide
a proper extended descrition. Policy section 2.3.3 states:
The description should be written so that it gives the system
Package: g77-3.3-doc
Version: 1:3.3.1-0pre0
Severity: important
Justification: section 2.3.3
Your package does not comply with the policy as it does not provide
a proper extended descrition. Policy section 2.3.3 states:
The description should be written so that it gives the system
Package: gcc-3.3
Version: 1:3.3.2-0pre2
Severity: important
Justification: section 2.3.3
Your package does not comply with the policy as it does not provide
a proper extended descrition. Policy section 2.3.3 states:
The description should be written so that it gives the system
Package: cpp-3.3-doc
Version: 1:3.3.1-0pre0
Severity: important
Justification: section 2.3.3
Your package does not comply with the policy as it does not provide
a proper extended descrition. Policy section 2.3.3 states:
The description should be written so that it gives the system
Package: gnat-3.3-doc
Version: 1:3.3.1-0pre0
Severity: important
Justification: section 2.3.3
Your package does not comply with the policy as it does not provide
a proper extended descrition. Policy section 2.3.3 states:
The description should be written so that it gives the system
Package: gnat-3.2-doc
Version: 1:3.2.3-6
Severity: important
Justification: section 2.3.3
Your package does not comply with the policy as it does not provide
a proper extended descrition. Policy section 2.3.3 states:
The description should be written so that it gives the system
Package: gcc-3.2
Version: 1:3.2.3-8
Severity: important
Justification: section 2.3.3
Your package does not comply with the policy as it does not provide
a proper extended descrition. Policy section 2.3.3 states:
The description should be written so that it gives the system
LAST_UPDATED: Mon Sep 8 19:46:09 UTC 2003
Native configuration is powerpc-unknown-linux-gnu
=== g++ tests ===
Running target unix
XPASS: g++.dg/other/packed1.C execution test
XPASS: g++.other/init5.C Execution test
=== g++ Summary ===
# of expected passes
LAST_UPDATED: Mon Sep 8 19:46:09 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 passes
LAST_UPDATED: Mon Sep 8 19:46:09 UTC 2003
Native configuration is hppa-unknown-linux-gnu
=== g++ tests ===
Running target unix
FAIL: g++.dg/compat/break/bitfield7 x_tst.o compile
UNRESOLVED: g++.dg/compat/break/bitfield7 x_tst.o-y_tst.o link
UNRESOLVED:
LAST_UPDATED: Mon Sep 8 19:46:09 UTC 2003
Native configuration is i486-pc-linux-gnu
=== g++ tests ===
Running target unix
FAIL: g++.dg/tls/init-2.C (test for excess errors)
XPASS: g++.other/init5.C Execution test
=== g++ Summary ===
# of expected passes
LAST_UPDATED: Mon Sep 8 19:46:09 UTC 2003
Native configuration is ia64-unknown-linux-gnu
=== g++ tests ===
Running target unix
FAIL: g++.dg/eh/forced1.C execution test
FAIL: g++.dg/init/array11.C (test for excess errors)
FAIL: g++.dg/tls/init-2.C (test for excess errors)
FAIL:
On Tue, Sep 09, 2003 at 11:55:44PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
The description should be written so that it gives the system
administrator enough information to decide whether to install the
package.
it does.
Agreed, my mistake. I should have reviewed the description
Javier Fernández-Sanguino Peña writes:
Package: gnat-3.3-doc
Version: 1:3.3.1-0pre0
Severity: important
Justification: section 2.3.3
Your package does not comply with the policy as it does not provide
a proper extended descrition. Policy section 2.3.3 states:
The description should
Package: libobjc1
Version: 1:3.3.1-0pre0
Severity: important
Justification: section 2.3.3
Your package does not comply with the policy as it does not provide
a proper extended descrition. Policy section 2.3.3 states:
The description should be written so that it gives the system
Package: libgcj-common
Version: 1:3.3.1-0pre0
Severity: important
Justification: section 2.3.3
Your package does not comply with the policy as it does not provide
a proper extended descrition. Policy section 2.3.3 states:
The description should be written so that it gives the system
Your message dated Tue, 9 Sep 2003 23:46:46 +0200
with message-id [EMAIL PROTECTED]
and subject line Bug#209486: The package description does not follow Debian
policy
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
Your message dated Tue, 9 Sep 2003 23:55:17 +0200
with message-id [EMAIL PROTECTED]
and subject line Bug#209687: The package description does not follow Debian
policy
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
Your message dated Tue, 9 Sep 2003 23:55:44 +0200
with message-id [EMAIL PROTECTED]
and subject line Bug#209517: The package description does not follow Debian
policy
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
Your message dated Tue, 9 Sep 2003 23:54:55 +0200
with message-id [EMAIL PROTECTED]
and subject line Bug#209590: The package description does not follow Debian
policy
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
Your message dated Wed, 10 Sep 2003 00:09:14 +0200
with message-id [EMAIL PROTECTED]
and subject line Bug#209598: The package description does not follow Debian
policy
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
Your message dated Wed, 10 Sep 2003 00:09:35 +0200
with message-id [EMAIL PROTECTED]
and subject line Bug#209528: The package description does not follow Debian
policy
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
Your message dated Wed, 10 Sep 2003 00:19:45 +0200
with message-id [EMAIL PROTECTED]
and subject line Bug#209620: The package description does not follow Debian
policy
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
Your message dated Wed, 10 Sep 2003 00:17:59 +0200
with message-id [EMAIL PROTECTED]
and subject line Bug#209634: The package description does not follow Debian
policy
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
Your message dated Wed, 10 Sep 2003 00:20:43 +0200
with message-id [EMAIL PROTECTED]
and subject line Bug#209503: The package description does not follow Debian
policy
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
37 matches
Mail list logo
