Get the Finest Rolex Watch Replica !
We only sell premium watches. There's no battery in these replicas
just like the real ones since they charge themselves as you move.
The second hand moves JUST like the real ones, too.
These original watches sell in stores for thousands of dollars.
We sell
--- Additional Comments From tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-22
01:13 ---
The jar file is actually missing the files that gcj says it cannot find.
And, these classes are definitely referred to by other classes in the jar.
So, that is a problem with the jar file, at least for the C+
--- Additional Comments From tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-22
01:06 ---
I've checked in a patch on the 4.0 branch.
I will put it on the trunk when it emerges from its current
slushy state; I am leaving the PR open until then.
I'm not planning to put this on the 3.4 branch, but if
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-22
01:04 ---
Subject: Bug 21703
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: gcc-4_0-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-05-22 01:04:47
Modified files:
libjava: Change
--- Additional Comments From tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-22
00:37 ---
One more note -- the test case will loop infinitely
even when the intern() bug has been fixed, since every
'char' value is <= \u
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21703
--- You are
--- Additional Comments From tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-21
23:56 ---
In the upstream PR, a real deadlock is mentioned.
The backtrace shows the finalizer thread blocking.
Probably what is happening is that one thread is
spinning while looking for an empty slot in the string
has
--- Additional Comments From tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-21
23:48 ---
Testing a patch.
--
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |trom
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-21
23:35 ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> Confirmed, most likely what needs to happen is to add a check to libstdc++'s
> configure for llabs.
This again should happen.
--
What|Removed
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-21
23:34 ---
Reopening for now.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|RE
--- Additional Comments From g_bugz at zewt dot org 2005-05-21 23:26
---
(Awesome. I spend ten minutes typing out a response, the tracker goes "you
can't do that!", and I lose it all. Only Debian gets their tracker right ...)
(Very old response, since the fact that this was closed wa
Accepted:
java-gcj-compat_1.0.28-1.diff.gz
to pool/main/j/java-gcj-compat/java-gcj-compat_1.0.28-1.diff.gz
java-gcj-compat_1.0.28-1.dsc
to pool/main/j/java-gcj-compat/java-gcj-compat_1.0.28-1.dsc
java-gcj-compat_1.0.28-1_all.deb
to pool/main/j/java-gcj-compat/java-gcj-compat_1.0.28-1_all.deb
reopen 228645
thanks
The bug is valid, and reopened upstream.
--
Glenn Maynard
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
David S. Miller wrote:
[snip]
> This is not a bug, it should be closed. On sparc64, gcc should emit
> 64-bit code by default. If you want 32-bit code emitted on a sparc64
> system you have exactly two options 1) add -m32 to the command line
> or 2) run your build in a "sparc32 bash" environment.
From: Thiemo Seufer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sun, 22 May 2005 01:37:50 +0200
> David S. Miller wrote:
> [snip]
> > This is not a bug, it should be closed. On sparc64, gcc should emit
> > 64-bit code by default. If you want 32-bit code emitted on a sparc64
> > system you have exactly two options
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> reopen 228645
Bug#228645: [PR 13943] call of overloaded `llabs(int)' is ambiguous
Bug reopened, originator not changed.
> thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrat
On Sat, 21 May 2005 14:06:52 +0200
Falk Hueffner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> this bug has been open for quite some time as "important". Can some
> sparc people please comment on it?
This is not a bug, it should be closed. On sparc64, gcc should emit
64-bit code by default. If you want 32-bit c
> Andrew Young <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Another thought: the P3 machine only has 128 MB of memory. The
> > problem occurred when I increased the size of some (already very
> > big) arrays. The machine where it runs OK has 256 MB of memory.
>
> Hmm. Do you have any swap? If not, can you
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> retitle 301983 [fixed in 4.0] Unaligned accesses with ?-operator
Bug#301983: [fixed in 3.4] Unaligned accesses with ?-operator
Changed Bug title.
> retitle 304503 [fixed in 4.0] Unaligned accesses with ?-operator
Bug#304503: [fixed in 3.4] Unaligned ac
Your message dated Sun, 22 May 2005 00:21:23 +0200
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#254831: [ia64] cannot bootstrap current mainline
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 c
Your message dated Sun, 22 May 2005 00:32:10 +0200
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#290438: wrong code on i486 compiling with f77
-fno-automatic -O1
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If
Hi,
can you still reproduce this? (Apparently, upstream can't
(http://gcc.gnu.org/PR19008).) How about newer gcc?
--
Falk
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Your message dated Sun, 22 May 2005 00:15:14 +0200
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#241937: ICE in insn_default_length with -O2 -g
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 cas
Your message dated Sun, 22 May 2005 00:18:22 +0200
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#254499: libstdc++5: istringbuf/operator defect?
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 ca
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> tags 291374 + upstream fixed-upstream
Bug#291374: g++-3.3: nested struct with arrays initialisation asked for
bugreport
There were no tags set.
Tags added: upstream, fixed-upstream
> retitle 291374 [fixed in 3.4] g++-3.3: nested struct with arrays
>
Your message dated Sun, 22 May 2005 00:06:18 +0200
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#228645: call of overloaded `llabs(int)' is ambiguous
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 t
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-21
20:14 ---
Confirmed, looks like the intern hash table becomes full.
--
What|Removed |Added
--
What|Removed |Added
Component|java|libgcj
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21703
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
Your message dated Sat, 21 May 2005 23:54:34 +0200
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug #162690: [parisc]gcc 3.x produces openssl test code that
SEGVs with -march=2.0 and optimization >0
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that th
Your message dated Sat, 21 May 2005 23:44:28 +0200
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#206232: ICE (segfault on altivec code)
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
On Sat, May 21, 2005 at 03:06:14PM +0200, Falk Hueffner wrote:
> this is an ancient bug report about a miscompilation of openssl on
> hppa. Can somebody please check whether this is still an issue?
>
I tried this:
compiler: gcc -DOPENSSL_THREADS -D_REENTRANT -DOPENSSL_NO_KRB5 -DB_ENDIAN
-DTERMI
tags 293957 + upstream fixed-upstream
retitle 293957 [fixed in 3.4] gcc-3.3: No warning when initializing a variable
with itself.
thanks
Hi,
this is fixed in 3.4 by the introduction of -Winit-self.
--
Falk
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe"
Andrew Young <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> It only happens on the 800 MHz PIII box. I hoped your "bounds-check"
> option might help, but I still get:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/atmos/airm+refr/layers/adapt3/full_pics$ g77-2.95 \
> -fbounds-check mkimage.f && ./a.out
> Segme
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> tags 293957 + upstream fixed-upstream
Bug#293957: gcc-3.3: No warning when initializing a variable with itself.
There were no tags set.
Tags added: upstream, fixed-upstream
> retitle 293957 [fixed in 3.4] gcc-3.3: No warning when initializing a
> vari
Your message dated Sat, 21 May 2005 22:33:48 +0200
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#299929: cpp-3.3: cpp error when reading from pipe
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
tags 301983 - unreproducible
tags 301983 + wontfix upstream fixed-upstream
reassign 301983 gcc-3.4
retitle 301983 [fixed in 3.4] Unaligned accesses with ?-operator
retitle 304503 [fixed in 3.4] Unaligned accesses with ?-operator
thanks
Hi,
this is fixed in 4.0. It is not a regression, so there's
Your message dated Sat, 21 May 2005 22:16:57 +0200
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#289566: (no subject)
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 responsib
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> tags 301983 - unreproducible
Bug#301983: Unaligned traps
Tags were: unreproducible
Bug#304503: dccproc: unaligned trap
Tags removed: unreproducible
> tags 301983 + wontfix upstream fixed-upstream
Bug#301983: Unaligned traps
There were no tags set.
Bug#
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> tags 254659 + fixed-upstream
Bug#254659: [fixed in 4.0] [PR 16066] i386 loop strength reduction bug
Tags were: upstream
Tags added: fixed-upstream
> tags 209152 + upstream
Bug#209152: [fixed in 3.4] Large array problem on 64 bit platforms
Tags were: fi
Good day sir,
Do you wanna watch TV for free?
SURE YOU DO!
Will work on all U.S. and Canadian cable systems!
Check it out:
1clickchannel.com
Goodbye,
Walker Battelle
black plum black strawberry
That farmer is not missing reading.. Betty Sue wasn't enjoying working..
blue watermellon purple
Hello [EMAIL PROTECTED],
Do you wanna watch TV for free?
SURE YOU DO!
Will work on all U.S. and Canadian cable systems!
Check it out:
1clickchannel.com
Best Regards,
Maynard Hartman
black watermellon brown pair
I could go on and on, but I won't. We have many programs the children love. But
Your message dated Sat, 21 May 2005 22:11:03 +0200
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#288670: bug libstdc++5 1:3.3.5-5
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 yo
Your message dated Sat, 21 May 2005 21:44:59 +0200
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#272401: g++-3.3: Nonstandard location for stdlibc++ header
files
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If
Your message dated Sat, 21 May 2005 21:31:45 +0200
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#221565: g++-3.3: bad code generation
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 no
tags 217793 + unreproducible
thanks
Hi,
I cannot reproduce this either on vore with gcc-3.3 3.3.5-12 and libc6
2.3.2.ds1-21.
--
Falk
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> tags 217793 + unreproducible
Bug#217793: gcc-3.3: SIGBUS when trying to profile
There were no tags set.
Tags added: unreproducible
> thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
Debian bug tracking system administrator
(
Andrew Young <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Program mkimage
Hi,
thanks for the code. I tried to reproduce the problem like this:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/tmp% g77-2.95 -fbounds-check mkimage.f && ./a.out
Transfer tables have 0. resolution,
but mkimage program can handle only 0.03125
-- ch
Your message dated Sat, 21 May 2005 20:03:35 +0200
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#233891: [hppa] maxima/acl2 failures at -O1/-O2, -O0 ok
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
On Sat, May 21, 2005 at 03:58:23PM +0200, Falk Hueffner wrote:
> it seems that acl2 now builds on hppa. Can we close this bug?
yes.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Are You Ready?
We are accepting mortgage requests.
You don't have good credit history? That's not a problem!
The approval system it's very fast and simple.
Go to the link below right now.
http://www.h1gher.net/totally.asp
Best Regards,
Elbert Stallings
PS: If you are not interested in this
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-21
14:54 ---
With the mainline, I get:
antlr/TokenStreamRewriteEngine.java:0: error: cannot find file for class
antlr.TokenStreamRewriteEngine$RewriteOperation
antlr/TokenStreamRewriteEngine.java:0: error: cannot find f
Your message dated Sat, 21 May 2005 17:17:18 +0200
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#301877: gcc-3.3: -O3 is defining BIG_ENDIAN on little
endian machines
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> reassign 121269 gcc-3.3
Bug#121269: [fixed in 3.4] On i386, gcc-3.0 allows $ in indentifiers but not
the asm
Bug#121282: [PR c/9209] On i386, gcc-3.0 allows $ in indentifiers but not the
asm
Bug reassigned from package `gcc' to `gcc-3.3'.
> reassign
Your message dated Sat, 21 May 2005 16:40:20 +0200
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#284409: g++-3.3: Internal compiler error: virtual memory
exhausted
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
I
Hi,
can you try this with gcc-3.3 or gcc-4.0?
--
Falk
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Your message dated Sat, 21 May 2005 16:02:45 +0200
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug #251901: [mips, mipsel] Internal compiler error in
compiling atlas3: broke from 3.3.3-0pre4 -> 3.3.3-9
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim tha
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> submitter 265539 Andreas Metzler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Bug#265539: Possible license conflict. GPL but links against OpenSSL.
Changed Bug submitter from Andreas Metzler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> to Andreas
Metzler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>.
> submitter 232543 Andrea
Hi Ben,
is this still a probkem with gij 3.4 or 4.0? If so, could you try to
prepare a test case so we can forward it upstream?
--
Falk
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi,
it seems that acl2 now builds on hppa. Can we close this bug?
--
Falk
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> reassign 198261 g++-3.3
Bug#198261: [fixed in 3.4] ICE when using namespaced typedef of primitive type
as struct
Bug reassigned from package `g++' to `g++-3.3'.
> severity 198261 minor
Bug#198261: [fixed in 3.4] ICE when using namespaced typedef of pr
Here is the testcase for the bug:
--cut
@interface Foo
-(void) foo;
@end
@interface Foo_Bar
-(void) foo;
@end
@implementation Foo (Bar_Baz)
-(void) F {}
@end
@implementation Foo_Bar (Baz)
-(void) F {}
@end
--cut--
Hi,
this is an ancient bug report about a miscompilation of openssl on
hppa. Can somebody please check whether this is still an issue?
--
Falk
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Your message dated Sat, 21 May 2005 14:36:59 +0200
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug #295750: cannot compile kernel when 2.6.10 is installed
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 no
tags 297112 + unreproducible
reassign 297112 g77-2.95
thanks
Hi,
we need the source to reproduce this. Also, can you please this with
g77-3.3 or g77-3.4?
--
Falk
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> tags 297112 + unreproducible
Bug#297112: g77 compiles program that segfaults before executing the Fortran
code
There were no tags set.
Tags added: unreproducible
> reassign 297112 g77-2.95
Bug#297112: g77 compiles program that segfaults before executi
reassign 283042 g++-3.3
tags 283042 + unreproducible
thanks
Hi,
we cannot do anything about this without the preprocessed source, as
obtained by adding -save-temps to the g++ options.
--
Falk
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Cont
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> reassign 283042 g++-3.3
Bug#283042: smilutils_0.3.0-5(hppa/unstable): FTBFS: bad hppa assembly
Bug reassigned from package `gcc' to `g++-3.3'.
> tags 283042 + unreproducible
Bug#283042: smilutils_0.3.0-5(hppa/unstable): FTBFS: bad hppa assembly
There w
Hi,
this bug has been open for quite some time as "important". Can some
sparc people please comment on it?
--
Falk
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
reassign 270795 g++-3.3
retitle 270795 [fixed in 3.4] monster-masher broken in fr_BE locale, Segfault
at start
tags 270795 fixed-upstream
severity 270795 normal
forwarded 270795 http://gcc.gnu.org/PR16011
thanks
Hi,
according to http://gcc.gnu.org/PR16011, this is fixed for 3.4.
--
Fal
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> reassign 270795 g++-3.3
Bug#270795: monster-masher broken in fr_BE locale, Segfault at start
Bug reassigned from package `g++' to `g++-3.3'.
> retitle 270795 [fixed in 3.4] monster-masher broken in fr_BE locale, Segfault
> at start
Bug#270795: monster
Hi,
can the lapack maintainers say anything about the current state of
this bug? Is this still a problem with 3.4 or 4.0?
--
Falk
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
reassign 270620 gcc-3.4
tags 270620 + fixed-upstream
retitle 270620 [fixed in 4.0] o32 ABI breakage in gcc 3.3/3.4
thanks
Hi,
the patch is now in gcc 4.0. I'm not sure whether we should try to
backport it.
--
Falk
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsub
tags 273442 + unreproducible
thanks
Hi,
we cannot do anything about this without the preprocessed source, as
obtained by adding -save-temps to the options.
--
Falk
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Your message dated Sat, 21 May 2005 13:52:39 +0200
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug #256024: gcc: compile time multiplied by a factor of 8
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
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> reassign 270620 gcc-3.4
Bug#270620: o32 ABI breakage in gcc 3.3/3.4
Bug reassigned from package `gcc' to `gcc-3.4'.
> tags 270620 + fixed-upstream
Bug#270620: o32 ABI breakage in gcc 3.3/3.4
Tags were: patch
Tags added: fixed-upstream
> retitle 270620
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> tags 273442 + unreproducible
Bug#273442: ICE building Linux 2.6.9-rc2-mm3 fs/cachefs/inode.c
There were no tags set.
Tags added: unreproducible
> thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
Debian bug tracking system ad
tags 253077 +unreproducible
Hi,
without preprocessed source (as obtained by adding -save-temps), we
cannot do anything about this.
--
Falk
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
tags 262717 + fixed-upstream wontfix
retitle 262717 [fixed in 3.0] gcc-2.95: checking for va_list assignment copy...
configure: error: no
thanks
Hi,
according to the reporter, this is fixed in 3.0, and we won't touch
2.95 anymore.
--
Falk
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED
Your message dated Sat, 21 May 2005 13:35:13 +0200
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug #253239: gcc-2.95 does not compile
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
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> tags 262717 + fixed-upstream wontfix
Bug#262717: gcc-2.95: checking for va_list assignment copy... configure: error:
no
There were no tags set.
Tags added: fixed-upstream, wontfix
> retitle 262717 [fixed in 3.0] gcc-2.95: checking for va_list assignme
Your message dated Sat, 21 May 2005 13:26:21 +0200
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line
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 responsibility to reopen the
Bug
Falk Hueffner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> And there's a shlibs problem in a few packages, for example
>>
>> dh_shlibdeps -pgnat-4.0 -L libgnat-4.0 -l debian/libgnat-4.0/usr/lib
>> dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: could not find path for ld.so.1
>> dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: could not find any packages fo
Roger Leigh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> ./libtool: line 4696: /usr/bin/expr: Argument list too long
> using piecewise archive linking...
>
> This is while creating libgcj.a, so there may be some object files
> missed out of the ar command. It's happening inside libtool.
The piecewise linking s
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Falk Hueffner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Roger Leigh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> I found quite a number of errors, many minor, some serious, building
>> 4.0.0-7, in both the gcc build and while packaging. I've put all
>> the detail in bug #30
Roger Leigh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I found quite a number of errors, many minor, some serious, building
> 4.0.0-7, in both the gcc build and while packaging. I've put all
> the detail in bug #309986.
You mention warnings about "returning pointer to automatic variable"
and "expr is called
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi folks,
I found quite a number of errors, many minor, some serious, building
4.0.0-7, in both the gcc build and while packaging. I've put all the
detail in bug #309986.
Regards,
Roger
[PS. I'm not subscribed to debian-gcc, so I'd appreciate a
Body Wrap at Home to lose 6-20 inches in one hour.
With Bodywrap we guarantee:
you'll lose 6-8 Inches in one hour
100% Satisfaction or your money back
Bodywrap is soothing formula that contours,
cleanses and rejuvenates your body while
reducing inches.
http://latvia.weightlossfirm.co
> On Thu, May 19, 2005 at 10:41:31PM +0200, Jeroen N. Witmond wrote:
>> >
>> > Also, note that this is an unsound way to test for TLS. The compiler,
>> > assembler, linker, C library, and on some platforms kernel must all
>> > support it.
>> >
>>
>> I am running debian/sarge (Linux DoornRoosje 2.4
Increase your CUM VOLUME, and Orgasm Length
main benifits:
- The longest most intense Orgasms of your life
- Erctions like steel
- lncreased libido/desire
- Stronger ejaculaton (watch where your aiming)
- Multiple 0rgasms
- Up to 500% more volume (cover her in it if you want)
- Studies show it tast
88 matches
Mail list logo
