Bug#391334: error: no matching function for call

2006-10-05 Thread Glenn Maynard
Package: g++-4.1 Version: 4.1.1-15 Severity: normal With attached code, t.cc: In member function ‘void ThemeMetric::Read() [with T = GoalType]’: t.cc:32: instantiated from here t.cc:22: error: no matching function for call to ‘FromStack(GoalType&)’ t.cc:3: note: candidates are: void LuaHelpers:

Bug#390620: arm-specific ICE on valid code

2006-10-05 Thread Richard B. Kreckel
Matthias Klose wrote: as a workaround, the file compiles without "-finline-limit=1200" Thank you. I've changed debian/rules to not add this compiler option on arm. Still, since you have apparently tried compiling it on an arm system: have you submitted the preprocessed source as a gcc PR? I

Bug#391268: _REENTRANT defined when compiling non-threaded code

2006-10-05 Thread Falk Hueffner
Matthias Klose <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > see the attached patch, based on the one from the redhat 4.1 > branch. Thiemo, Falk, Phil, please could you review the patch? OK with me (although I also don't quite see it's a bug). -- Falk -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] wi

Bug#389539: marked as done (file conflict with java-gcj-compat-dev)

2006-10-05 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Your message dated Thu, 5 Oct 2006 21:40:19 +0200 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line file conflict with java-gcj-compat-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 this is not the case it is now

Bug#391268: _REENTRANT defined when compiling non-threaded code

2006-10-05 Thread Matthias Klose
Ryan Murray writes: > Package: libstdc++6 > Version: 4.1.1-15 > Severity: important > > This is already reported upstream: > http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11953 > > It was fixed, but only on the redhat 4.1 branch. The fix is needed on trunk, > and the general 4.1 branch. > > A sim

Bug#391268: _REENTRANT defined when compiling non-threaded code

2006-10-05 Thread Ryan Murray
Package: libstdc++6 Version: 4.1.1-15 Severity: important This is already reported upstream: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11953 It was fixed, but only on the redhat 4.1 branch. The fix is needed on trunk, and the general 4.1 branch. A simple testcase: test.cpp: #include #ifdef _

Bug#322723: diff please

2006-10-05 Thread ccmail111
Hi, I am looking for fix to the problem: ip route add 0.0.0.0/0 via 10.130.1.145 dev eth0 ip: RTNETLINK answers: Network is unreachable I understand it is fixed. Can you please email me the source code diff ? I am unable to upgrade due to reasons. I would like to patch it to my kernel. Thanks,

gcj-4.1_4.1.1-15j1_m68k.changes ACCEPTED

2006-10-05 Thread Debian Installer
Accepted: gappletviewer-4.1_4.1.1-15j1_m68k.deb to pool/main/g/gcj-4.1/gappletviewer-4.1_4.1.1-15j1_m68k.deb gcj-4.1-base_4.1.1-15j1_m68k.deb to pool/main/g/gcj-4.1/gcj-4.1-base_4.1.1-15j1_m68k.deb gcj-4.1_4.1.1-15j1_m68k.deb to pool/main/g/gcj-4.1/gcj-4.1_4.1.1-15j1_m68k.deb gij-4.1_4.1.1-1

Processing of gcj-4.1_4.1.1-15j1_m68k.changes

2006-10-05 Thread Archive Administrator
gcj-4.1_4.1.1-15j1_m68k.changes uploaded successfully to localhost along with the files: gcj-4.1-base_4.1.1-15j1_m68k.deb gcj-4.1_4.1.1-15j1_m68k.deb gij-4.1_4.1.1-15j1_m68k.deb libgcj7-0_4.1.1-15j1_m68k.deb libgcj7-awt_4.1.1-15j1_m68k.deb gappletviewer-4.1_4.1.1-15j1_m68k.deb libgcj7

Bug#390928: marked as done (gij-4.1 uninstallable)

2006-10-05 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Your message dated Thu, 5 Oct 2006 16:47:45 +0200 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line 390928: gij-4.1 uninstallable 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 resp

Bug#390654: marked as done (gcj-4.1_4.1.1-15(hppa/unstable): FTBFS: missing argument?)

2006-10-05 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Your message dated Thu, 5 Oct 2006 16:48:38 +0200 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line #390654: gcj-4.1_4.1.1-15(hppa/unstable): FTBFS: missing argument? has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If th

gcj installation problem causes FTBFS in unrelated Ada package

2006-10-05 Thread Ludovic Brenta
Hi, I uploaded libflorist and saw it FTBFS on some architectures due to Java packages failing to install. This package contains zero lines of Java source, so it does not need or want anything Java-related on the system. The specific failures were: on s390, gij-4.1 failed to install per #390928.

Bug#390532: marked as done (gcj-4.1: Dangeling symlink for man page rmic.1)

2006-10-05 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Your message dated Thu, 05 Oct 2006 05:17:49 -0700 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#390532: fixed in gcj-4.1 4.1.1-15j1 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

Bug#390874: marked as done (libgcj7-0 uninstallable)

2006-10-05 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Your message dated Thu, 05 Oct 2006 05:17:49 -0700 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#390874: fixed in gcj-4.1 4.1.1-15j1 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

Bug#390966: marked as done (removal horribly broken)

2006-10-05 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Your message dated Thu, 05 Oct 2006 05:17:49 -0700 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#390966: fixed in gcj-4.1 4.1.1-15j1 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

Bug#390425: marked as done (gij-4.1: dangling symlink rmiregistry.1.gz in /etc/alternatives)

2006-10-05 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Your message dated Thu, 05 Oct 2006 05:17:49 -0700 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#390425: fixed in gcj-4.1 4.1.1-15j1 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

gcj-4.1_4.1.1-15j1_multi.changes ACCEPTED

2006-10-05 Thread Debian Installer
Accepted: gappletviewer-4.1_4.1.1-15j1_hppa.deb to pool/main/g/gcj-4.1/gappletviewer-4.1_4.1.1-15j1_hppa.deb gappletviewer-4.1_4.1.1-15j1_i386.deb to pool/main/g/gcj-4.1/gappletviewer-4.1_4.1.1-15j1_i386.deb gappletviewer-4.1_4.1.1-15j1_powerpc.deb to pool/main/g/gcj-4.1/gappletviewer-4.1_4.

Processing of gcj-4.1_4.1.1-15j1_multi.changes

2006-10-05 Thread Archive Administrator
gcj-4.1_4.1.1-15j1_multi.changes uploaded successfully to localhost along with the files: gappletviewer-4.1_4.1.1-15j1_hppa.deb gcj-4.1-base_4.1.1-15j1_hppa.deb libgcj7-awt_4.1.1-15j1_powerpc.deb gij-4.1_4.1.1-15j1_hppa.deb libgcj7-dbg_4.1.1-15j1_i386.deb libgcj7-dev_4.1.1-15j1_i386.deb