gcc-4.2_4.2.2-5_powerpc.changes uploaded successfully to localhost
along with the files:
gcc-4.2-base_4.2.2-5_powerpc.deb
libgcc1_4.2.2-5_powerpc.deb
libgcc1-dbg_4.2.2-5_powerpc.deb
lib64gcc1_4.2.2-5_powerpc.deb
lib64gcc1-dbg_4.2.2-5_powerpc.deb
libgomp1_4.2.2-5_powerpc.deb
libgomp1-d
* Camm Maguire <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008-01-03 17:44]:
> Are we going to have two arm ports, or is the old one going away for
> lenny?
arm will be in lenny but it'll probably go away in the next release or
the one after the next.
armel will hopefully be in lenny, but it's not even part of unstabl
On Thu, 2008-01-03 at 17:44 -0500, Camm Maguire wrote:
> Greetings!
>
> Martin Michlmayr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > * Camm Maguire <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008-01-02 16:55]:
> > > Is EABI the old arm, or the new? Couldn't this make a difference?
> >
> > I can reproduce the problem with the
swhe writes:
> when i upgrade this package on my i386 machine this morning, i found out that
> this package depend on lib64gcc1 and than installed lib64gcc1 &
> libc6-amd64 packages.
> i'd like to know why libstdc++6 does not depend on libgcc1 any more on
> i386 arch?
> why we should have amd64 lib
when i upgrade this package on my i386 machine this morning, i found out that
this package depend on lib64gcc1 and than installed lib64gcc1 &
libc6-amd64 packages.
i'd like to know why libstdc++6 does not depend on libgcc1 any more on
i386 arch?
why we should have amd64 lib installed on i386 machin
--
tim at buttersideup dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tim at buttersideup dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id
Greetings!
Martin Michlmayr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> * Camm Maguire <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008-01-02 16:55]:
> > Is EABI the old arm, or the new? Couldn't this make a difference?
>
> I can reproduce the problem with the old ABI (i.e. the current port in
> Debian). I'll open a bug report wi
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||zadeck at naturalbridge dot
|
--- Comment #8 from rakdver at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-03 21:23 ---
(In reply to comment #7)
> The final tree IL looks good, so I suspect the RTL loop optimizer gets this
> wrong.
>
> add r1, sp, #56 // upper loop-bound; should have been #12
> I actually wanted to say 'should
--
aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?
--- Comment #7 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-03 18:58 ---
The final tree IL looks good, so I suspect the RTL loop optimizer gets this
wrong.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #1 from tbm at cyrius dot com 2008-01-03 18:27 ---
This happens with 4.1, 4.2 and trunk on old ABI. Apparently it doesn't
happen with EABI.
--
tbm at cyrius dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #6 from tbm at cyrius dot com 2008-01-03 18:22 ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> I see different IL for 4.2 compared to 4.3, is the bug present in 4.3? Can
> you
> attach the optimized tree dump?
I also get a segfault with the testcase and 4.3.0 20070916.
The original progra
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> forwarded 458745 http://gcc.gnu.org/PR34652
Bug#458745: arm-only miscompilation of alloca code
Noted your statement that Bug has been forwarded to http://gcc.gnu.org/PR34652.
> tags 458745 + upstream
Bug#458745: arm-only miscompilation of alloca code
T
--
tbm at cyrius dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34628
--- You ar
--- Comment #5 from tbm at cyrius dot com 2008-01-03 18:07 ---
Created an attachment (id=14870)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14870&action=view)
optimized tree dump (4.2)
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34628
--- You are receiving this mail
* Camm Maguire <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008-01-02 16:55]:
> Is EABI the old arm, or the new? Couldn't this make a difference?
I can reproduce the problem with the old ABI (i.e. the current port in
Debian). I'll open a bug report with GCC.
--
Martin Michlmayr
http://www.cyrius.com/
--
To UNSUBS
--- Comment #4 from tbm at cyrius dot com 2008-01-03 18:03 ---
Bugzilla wraps the testcase in a way that some commented out is no longer
commented out and so you don't see the segfault. Here's the testcase again
with proper wrapping:
typedef unsigned short u16;
typedef unsigned char u8
--- Comment #16 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-03 16:26
---
4.0.0 really did not work either, it just did not cause a crash as the checks
for invalid gimple was not there.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #15 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-03 16:23
---
This was caused by the patch which fixed PR 20280 and the 2nd iteration of the
patch was rejected so unassigning from me.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
Accepted:
cpp-4.3-doc_4.3-20080102-1_all.deb
to pool/main/g/gcc-4.3/cpp-4.3-doc_4.3-20080102-1_all.deb
cpp-4.3_4.3-20080102-1_i386.deb
to pool/main/g/gcc-4.3/cpp-4.3_4.3-20080102-1_i386.deb
fixincludes_4.3-20080102-1_i386.deb
to pool/main/g/gcc-4.3/fixincludes_4.3-20080102-1_i386.deb
g++-4.3
gcc-4.3_4.3-20080102-1_i386.changes uploaded successfully to localhost
along with the files:
gcc-4.3_4.3-20080102-1.dsc
gcc-4.3_4.3-20080102.orig.tar.gz
gcc-4.3_4.3-20080102-1.diff.gz
gcc-4.3-source_4.3-20080102-1_all.deb
cpp-4.3-doc_4.3-20080102-1_all.deb
libstdc++6-4.3-doc_4.3-2008010
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> # Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.10.11
> found 458860 1.14.14
Bug#458860: libstdc++6: Dependency on lib64gcc1 on i386
Bug marked as found in version 1.14.14.
> retitle 458860 dpkg-shlibdeps: chooses bad symbols files when
clone 458860 -1
reassign 458860 dpkg-dev
block 458860 by -1
thanks
Michael Biebl writes:
> Package: libstdc++6
> Version: 4.2.2-5
> Severity: important
>
> The latest upgrade of libstdc++6 on i386 introduced a dependency on lib64gcc1,
> which in turn pulls libc6-amd64 (10Mb installed!).
> As my m
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> clone 458860 -1
Bug#458860: libstdc++6: Dependency on lib64gcc1 on i386
Bug 458860 cloned as bug 458894.
> reassign 458860 dpkg-dev
Bug#458860: libstdc++6: Dependency on lib64gcc1 on i386
Bug reassigned from package `libstdc++6' to `dpkg-dev'.
> block
Package: libstdc++6
Version: 4.2.2-5
Severity: important
The latest upgrade of libstdc++6 on i386 introduced a dependency on lib64gcc1,
which in turn pulls libc6-amd64 (10Mb installed!).
As my machine is i386 i.e. 32 bit only (pentium m) I don't want to have
libc6-amd64 and lib64gcc1 installed.
I
* Camm Maguire <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008-01-02 16:55]:
> Is EABI the old arm, or the new? Couldn't this make a difference?
EABI is the new ABI.
--
Martin Michlmayr
http://www.cyrius.com/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PR
27 matches
Mail list logo
