[Bug c++/19004] ICE in uses_template_parms at cp/pt.c:4860

--- Additional Comments From reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-02 01:46 --- So closing now. -- What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESO

[Bug c++/19004] ICE in uses_template_parms at cp/pt.c:4860

--- Additional Comments From reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-02 01:45 --- Fixed for gcc 4.0.0. -- What|Removed |Added Summary|[3.4/4.0 regression] ICE in

Results for 3.3.5 (Debian 1:3.3.5-8) testsuite on mips-linux

LAST_UPDATED: Sun Jan 30 17:58:51 UTC 2005 Native configuration is mips-linux (resume.rfc822.org) === gpc tests === Running target any === gpc Summary === # of tests3910 # of expected passes 3905 # of unsupported tests5 /build/buildd/gc

Results for 3.3.5 (Debian 1:3.3.5-8) testsuite on arm-unknown-linux-gnu

LAST_UPDATED: Sun Jan 30 17:58:51 UTC 2005 Native configuration is arm-unknown-linux-gnu === libjava tests === Running target unix FAIL: calls run FAIL: cxxtest run FAIL: field run FAIL: final_method run FAIL: findclass run FAIL: invoke run FAIL: martin run FAIL: noclass run FAI

Bug#291641: libtool: resolves dependencies to the install tree rather than the build tree

Scott James Remnant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Sat, 2005-01-22 at 01:01 +, Philip Martin wrote: > >> I find the libtool inter-library documentation confusing, but I think this >> is a Debian bug simply because Debian's libtool fails and GNU's libtool >> appears to work. Is there some re

[no subject]

From: Nicholle Jarencio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Did You See CGHI Yet? rtqbuq Date: Sat, 15 May 2004 22:37:20 -0500 Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: plain Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Bits with libgcc

So. This one I feel less silly about asking over, since it's behaving in what seems to be a fairly odd fashion indeed. [ Context: gcc-3.3 version 1:3.3.5-8, current unstable package, building ] [ with gcc-3.2 on a netbsd-i386 port system. ] Trying to do a build, I ge

Re: Doc-less GCC builds?

On Tue, Feb 01, 2005 at 09:54:42AM +0100, Matthias Klose wrote: > Joel Aelwyn writes: > > Am I just being dense, or is there *no* way to effectively turn off doc > > builds in the GCC packages as of 3.3/3.4? > > dpkg-buildpackage -B ... > fakeroot debian/rules binary-arch A good start, but the ot

Bug#292961: g++-3.3: g++ -- vastly uninformative error message

Greg Kochanski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> Which seems like an acceptable error message. Unfortunately, it is >> rather likely that this gets fixed in 3.3, too. > > How about this variant that defines inverse() ? > [...] Hmm. This seems like valid code, but g++ 3.3 still rejects it. However, t

Re: Doc-less GCC builds?

Joel Aelwyn writes: > Am I just being dense, or is there *no* way to effectively turn off doc > builds in the GCC packages as of 3.3/3.4? dpkg-buildpackage -B ... fakeroot debian/rules binary-arch > This is not a concern for normal > builds, but it can be extremely useful when, say, trying to boo

Processed: fixed gcc reports

Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > retitle 203212 [fixed in 4.0] [PR 11941] libgcj handles timezones wrongly Bug#203212: [PR 11941] libgcj handles timezones wrongly Changed Bug title. > retitle 286715 [fixed in 4.0] [PR 19711] gcj segfaults instead of reporting > the ambiguous expressi