#
# 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 #376609
# * http://gcc.gnu.org/PR28238
# * remote status changed: NEW - ASSIGNED
usertags 376609 -
#
# 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 #226952
# * http://gcc.gnu.org/PR6614
# * remote status changed: NEW - RESOLVED
# * remote resolution
#
# bts-link upstream status pull for source package gcc-4.2
# see http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2006/05/msg1.html
#
user [EMAIL PROTECTED]
# remote status report for #358235
# * http://gcc.gnu.org/PR28313
# * remote status changed: (?) - NEW
usertags 358235 + status-NEW
#
# bts-link upstream status pull for source package gcc-defaults
# see http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2006/05/msg1.html
#
user [EMAIL PROTECTED]
# remote status report for #367657
# * http://gcc.gnu.org/PR28322
# * remote status changed: (?) - UNCONFIRMED
usertags 367657 +
#
# bts-link upstream status pull for source package gcc-4.1
# see http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2006/05/msg1.html
#
user [EMAIL PROTECTED]
# remote status report for #356548
# * http://gcc.gnu.org/PR26670
# * remote status changed: UNCONFIRMED - ASSIGNED
usertags 356548 -
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
#
# 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]
Setting user to [EMAIL PROTECTED] (was [EMAIL PROTECTED]).
# remote status report for
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
#
# bts-link upstream status pull for source package gcc-defaults
# see http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2006/05/msg1.html
#
user [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Setting user to [EMAIL PROTECTED] (was [EMAIL PROTECTED]).
# remote status report
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
#
# 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]
Setting user to [EMAIL PROTECTED] (was [EMAIL PROTECTED]).
# remote status report
Accepted:
cpp-4.1_4.1.1-8_m68k.deb
to pool/main/g/gcc-4.1/cpp-4.1_4.1.1-8_m68k.deb
fastjar_4.1.1-8_m68k.deb
to pool/main/g/gcc-4.1/fastjar_4.1.1-8_m68k.deb
fixincludes_4.1.1-8_m68k.deb
to pool/main/g/gcc-4.1/fixincludes_4.1.1-8_m68k.deb
g++-4.1_4.1.1-8_m68k.deb
to
gcc-4.1_4.1.1-8_m68k.changes uploaded successfully to localhost
along with the files:
gcc-4.1-base_4.1.1-8_m68k.deb
libgcc2_4.1.1-8_m68k.deb
cpp-4.1_4.1.1-8_m68k.deb
protoize_4.1.1-8_m68k.deb
fixincludes_4.1.1-8_m68k.deb
libmudflap0_4.1.1-8_m68k.deb
libmudflap0-dev_4.1.1-8_m68k.deb
--- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-07-13 11:53 ---
*** Bug 28370 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-07-13 11:53 ---
This is invalid code with no diagnostic required.
See the full explaination in PR 28360 which is exactly the same case. In fact
with a real testcase :).
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 28360 ***
--- Comment #6 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-07-13 11:55 ---
Basicially the code was violating ODR rules before because of the anonymous
namespace.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28370
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the
--- Comment #7 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-07-13 12:19 ---
Note I think you should have first checked FSF 4.1.2 which will have not this
issue. 4.2.0 might have it, I might had been wrong at closing as a dup, that
might be because I am tried and had a long day and it is
--- Comment #8 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-07-13 14:08 ---
Here is a full reduced self contained testcase:
namespace
{
template typename Inst
struct rtl_Instance
{
static int * m_pInstance;
};
template typename Inst int * rtl_Instance Inst::m_pInstance = 0;
}
Package: libstdc++2.10-dev
Severity: serious
Version: 2.95.4.ds15-26
Hi
Your package is not installable on alpha or ia64 as it depends on
libc6-dev which is not available on these architectures. You might want
to depend on libc6.1-dev on these architectures...
Cheers
Luk
--
Luk Claes -
--- Comment #9 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-07-13 16:25 ---
The reason why the var is not emitted seems to be that
note_vague_linkage_var is not called on it in finish_static_data_member_decl.
If I replace
if (! processing_template_decl TREE_PUBLIC (decl))
--- Comment #10 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-07-13 16:50 ---
Testing a patch.
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
gcc-2.95_2.95.4.ds15-27_i386.changes uploaded successfully to localhost
along with the files:
gcc-2.95_2.95.4.ds15-27.dsc
gcc-2.95_2.95.4.ds15-27.diff.gz
cpp-2.95-doc_2.95.4-27_all.deb
g77-2.95-doc_2.95.4-27_all.deb
gcc-2.95-doc_2.95.4-27_all.deb
gpc-2.95-doc_2.95.4-27_all.deb
Accepted:
chill-2.95_2.95.4-27_i386.deb
to pool/main/g/gcc-2.95/chill-2.95_2.95.4-27_i386.deb
cpp-2.95-doc_2.95.4-27_all.deb
to pool/main/g/gcc-2.95/cpp-2.95-doc_2.95.4-27_all.deb
cpp-2.95_2.95.4-27_i386.deb
to pool/main/g/gcc-2.95/cpp-2.95_2.95.4-27_i386.deb
g++-2.95_2.95.4-27_i386.deb
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
# Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.9.20
notfound 378140 2.95.4.ds15-26
Bug#378140: Uninstallable on alpha/ia64 due to unmet dep libc6-dev
Bug marked as not found in version 2.95.4.ds15-26.
found 378140 1:2.95.4-26
Your message dated Thu, 13 Jul 2006 23:59:35 +0200
with message-id [EMAIL PROTECTED]
and subject line Bug#378140: Uninstallable on alpha/ia64 due to unmet dep
libc6-dev
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
severity 376084 serious
Bug#376084: ICE (k3d, ia64): in add_insn_before, at emit-rtl.c:3479
Severity set to `serious' from `important'
thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
Debian bug tracking system
severity 376084 serious
thanks
FTBFS-s in normal conditions, which is AFAIK what this bug is about,
are release-critical issues and should be tracked by a serious bug
report. I am consequently upgrading this back to serious. If you believe
that the GCC bug isn't serious, feel free to reassign
24 matches
Mail list logo
