Re: problems with g++-4.1

Brendan O'Dea writes: > On Thu, Jun 08, 2006 at 03:44:46PM +0200, Martin Michlmayr wrote: > >* Matthias Klose <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-06-08 14:50]: > >> Martin, maybe we can add a workaround in the Perl headers instead? > > > >I'm sure bod could just remove the use of 'register' for a while. > >

Bug#372605: FTBFS: parse.y: conflicts: 62 shift/reduce, 25 reduce/reduce

ok, looks like bison-2.3 breaks gpc. investigating ... > Package: gcc-4.1 > Version: 4.1.1-2 > Severity: serious > > Hello, > > It seems that currently gcc-4.1 is uncompilable: > > gnatgcc -g -DENABLE_CHECKING -DENABLE_ASSERT_CHECKING -DIN_GCC -W > -Wall -Wwrite-strings -Wstrict-prototypes

Bug#372605: FTBFS: parse.y: conflicts: 62 shift/reduce, 25 reduce/reduce

Package: gcc-4.1 Version: 4.1.1-2 Severity: serious Hello, It seems that currently gcc-4.1 is uncompilable: gnatgcc -g -DENABLE_CHECKING -DENABLE_ASSERT_CHECKING -DIN_GCC -W -Wall -Wwrite-strings -Wstrict-prototypes -Wmissing-prototypes -pedantic -Wno-long-long -Wno-variadic-macros -Wold-sty

Bug#200003: Any progress?

Ludovic Brenta writes: > Matthias Klose <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > The second thing is to remove the gfdl'd texi files from the sources, > > so that the package still builds. The idea is to replace these files > > with dummy content, such that the build still succeds and the Makefile > > don'

Bug#200003: Any progress?

On Sat, Jun 10, 2006, Ludovic Brenta wrote: > Unless I am mistaken, there was a Debian General Resolution lately > that allows GFDL'd documents in main, provided they have no > front-cover text, no back-cover text and no invariants. I am > concerned that wholesale deletion of all documentation fro

Bug#200003: Any progress?

Matthias Klose <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > The second thing is to remove the gfdl'd texi files from the sources, > so that the package still builds. The idea is to replace these files > with dummy content, such that the build still succeds and the Makefile > don't have to be patched. Unless I a

[bts-link] source package gcc-snapshot

# # bts-link upstream status pull for source package gcc-snapshot # see http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2006/05/msg1.html # user [EMAIL PROTECTED] # remote status report for #367866 # * http://gcc.gnu.org/PR27979 # * remote status changed: (?) -> NEW usertags 367866 + status-N

Bug#200003: Any progress?

tags 23 - patch thanks Mohammed Adnène Trojette writes: > tag 23 patch > thanks dude > > On Sat, Jan 07, 2006, Matthias Klose wrote: > > I do not intend to work on it until summer, when it becomes clear > > which compiler versions are included in etch. maybe these are 2.95, > > 3.4 and 4.

Processed: Re: Bug#200003: Any progress?

Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > tags 23 - patch Bug#23: [NONFREE-DOC:UNMODIFIABLE] cpp: contains non-free manpages Tags were: patch sarge-ignore Tags removed: patch > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking system admin

Processed: Re: Bug#200003: Any progress?

Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > tag 23 patch Bug#23: [NONFREE-DOC:UNMODIFIABLE] cpp: contains non-free manpages Tags were: sarge-ignore Tags added: patch > thanks dude Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking system administrat

Bug#200003: Any progress?

tag 23 patch thanks dude On Sat, Jan 07, 2006, Matthias Klose wrote: > I do not intend to work on it until summer, when it becomes clear > which compiler versions are included in etch. maybe these are 2.95, > 3.4 and 4.1. who knows ... > > I'm happy to include any patches before that, if you

Processed: tag gcc report

Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > tags 372152 + pending Bug#372152: g++-4.1: PR27935 appears to be unresolved (operator delete(void*, size_t) issue) There were no tags set. Bug#372559: gecode: FTBFS with g++-4.1: no suitable operator Tags added: pending > thanks Stopping processing he

Processed: Re: Bug#372559: gecode: FTBFS with g++-4.1: no suitable operator

Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > reassign 372559 g++-4.1 Bug#372559: gecode: FTBFS with g++-4.1: no suitable operator Bug reassigned from package `gecode' to `g++-4.1'. > merge 372559 372152 Bug#372152: g++-4.1: PR27935 appears to be unresolved (operator delete(void*, size_t) issue)

Bug#372557: gcc-3.3: segmentation fault of ld when compiling binary file with gcc

reassign 372557 binutils thanks > Compiling a binary file (which is not possible) cause ld to > segmentation fault. ld is binutils' domain. -- Falk -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Processed: Re: Bug#372557: gcc-3.3: segmentation fault of ld when compiling binary file with gcc

Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > reassign 372557 binutils Bug#372557: gcc-3.3: segmentation fault of ld when compiling binary file with gcc Bug reassigned from package `gcc-3.3' to `binutils'. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug t

Bug#372557: gcc-3.3: segmentation fault of ld when compiling binary file with gcc

Package: gcc-3.3 Version: 1:3.3.5-13 Severity: minor Compiling a binary file (which is not possible) cause ld to segmentation fault. $ gcc -v Reading specs from /usr/lib/gcc-lib/i486-linux/3.3.5/specs Configured with: ../src/configure -v --enable-languages=c,c++,java,f77,pascal,objc,ada,treelang