#
# bts-link upstream status pull for source package gcc-4.0
# see http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2006/05/msg1.html
#
user [EMAIL PROTECTED]
# remote status report for #365123
# * http://gcc.gnu.org/PR27453
# * remote status changed: (?) -> NEW
usertags 365123 + status-NEW
t
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-06 10:43 ---
Confirmed.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
Your message dated Sat, 6 May 2006 12:42:11 +0200
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#323186: gfortran-4.0: gfortran should warn about 'f95'
alias
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
please recheck with 4.1. jjtag 1.2 uses generics, which are not yet
supported in gcj-4.1.
Matthias
Andrew Potter writes:
> The latest version of jjtag is available from
> http://www.ioware.ca/projects/ejtag/jjtag.tgz
>
> Its written by Brett Foster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and he appears to get
> i
Your message dated Sat, 6 May 2006 12:19:02 +0200
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line corrupted error messages
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 responsibi
Your message dated Sat, 6 May 2006 12:15:20 +0200
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Some uses of pragma GCC visibility with -fPIC still build
position
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If thi
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> # submitted Debian report #365123 to gcc-gnats as PR 27453
> # http://gcc.gnu.org/PR27453
> forwarded 365123 http://gcc.gnu.org/PR27453
Bug#365123: gcc-4.0: gcov opens files with O_RDWR
Noted your statement that Bug has been forwarded to http://gcc.gnu.
Your message dated Sat, 6 May 2006 12:05:54 +0200
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line libstdc++6-4.0-dev: 4.0.3/libstdc++.a BFD: sh_link in section
XXX is incorrect
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt
Le Sam 6 Mai 2006 02:18, Matthias Klose a écrit :
> Please STOP resetting the forwarded address
I do not reset, I follow duplicates, which is a most wanted feature
> and revert the changes you already did.
I never do such a thing.
sometimes it looks like so, but it's because atm, I generate co
Maybe http://gcc.gnu.org/PR26864
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please could you recheck using gcc-4.1 / g++-4.1 as the compiler to
build your application?
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dylan Thurston writes:
> Package: libmudflap0-dev
> Version: 4.1.0-1
> Severity: minor
>
> This package contains a link
>
> /usr/lib64/libmudflap.so -> libmudflap.so.0.0.0
>
> This second file is not provided by any file. Why are there files
> being created in /usr/lib64 on a i386 architecture
Ted Percival writes:
> Package: libssp0-dev
> Version: 4.1.0-2
> Severity: normal
>
> Neither libssp0-dev or libssp0 contain any documentation on how to use
> them!
some links:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stack-smashing_protection
http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/hardened/gnu-stack.xml
http:/
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> Package: gcc-4.1
> Version: 4.1.0-2
> Severity: serious
>
> The patch ada-link-lib.dpatch changes the top-level configure.in, then
> calls autoconf to regenerate configure. Autoconf then bails out with:
>
> configure.in:2177: error: possibly undefined macro: AS_FOR_TA
14 matches
Mail list logo
