Re: Arch qualification for buster: call for DSA, Security, toolchain concerns

On Fri, 2018-06-29 at 11:44 +0100, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: [...] > On Fri, Jun 29, 2018 at 10:35 AM, Adam D. Barratt > wrote: > > > >  what is the reason why that package is not moving forward? > > > > I assume you're referring to the dpkg upl

Re: Arch qualification for buster: call for DSA, Security, toolchain concerns

On Fri, 2018-06-29 at 10:20 +0100, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: [...] >  debian-riscv has been repeatedly asking for a single zero-impact > line > to be included in *one* file in *one* dpkg-related package which > would > allow riscv to stop being a NMU architecture and become part of > debi

Re: Bug#763278: gcc 4.9 wheezy-pu?

On Fri, 2014-10-10 at 20:40 -0400, Michael Gilbert wrote: > On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 3:23 AM, Matthias Klose wrote: > > Am 10.10.2014 um 06:39 schrieb Adam D. Barratt: > >> On Thu, 2014-10-09 at 23:01 -0400, Michael Gilbert wrote: > >>> Note that the window for the ne

Re: Bug#763278: gcc 4.9 wheezy-pu?

On Thu, 2014-10-09 at 23:01 -0400, Michael Gilbert wrote: > Note that the window for the next stable update is closing in about a > week, so there isn't a lot of time. Actually, the /point release/ is in about a week. The advertised window for getting updates in to it closes this weekend. Regards

Bug#724865: gcc-4.8 also affected

On Thu, 2013-10-31 at 19:48 +0100, Matthias Klose wrote: > then you do use outdated packages: > > package: src:gcc-4.8 > version: 4.8.1-3 > > the recent version is 4.8.2-1. 4.8.1-3 is in unstable's Sources index, but as Extra-Source-Only: yes; I guess Johannes's tools need updating to handle

Bug#669479: ppl: diff for NMU version 0.11.2-6.1

On Thu, 2012-07-19 at 21:21 +0200, Roberto Bagnara wrote: > On 07/19/12 20:28, Nicolas Boulenguez wrote: > > I've prepared an NMU for ppl (versioned as 0.11.2-6.1), following the > > thread at http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=669479#22. > > Just wondering: do you have a strong reas

Re: Accepted gcc-defaults 1.118 (source all amd64)

On 14.05.2012 09:10, Matthias Klose wrote: On 13.05.2012 21:58, Adam D. Barratt wrote: On 13.05.2012 18:42, Matthias Klose wrote: On 13.05.2012 21:22, Julien Cristau wrote: On Sun, May 13, 2012 at 18:58:42 +0200, Matthias Klose wrote: which ones? are there any reports which are not tagged? I

Re: Accepted gcc-defaults 1.118 (source all amd64)

On 13.05.2012 18:42, Matthias Klose wrote: On 13.05.2012 21:22, Julien Cristau wrote: On Sun, May 13, 2012 at 18:58:42 +0200, Matthias Klose wrote: which ones? are there any reports which are not tagged? I went through the list of Lucas' new batch and tagged the appropriate ones. There were a

Re: Accepted gcc-defaults 1.118 (source all amd64)

On 13.05.2012 20:22, Julien Cristau wrote: On Sun, May 13, 2012 at 18:58:42 +0200, Matthias Klose wrote: On 13.05.2012 17:45, Philipp Kern wrote: > This doesn't mean that we shouldn't have gcc-4.7 in wheezy as an alternative, > just that it is highly problematic as the default at this point of

Re: Accepted gcc-defaults 1.118 (source all amd64)

On 08.05.2012 17:55, Matthias Klose wrote: stop blaming the compiler for unrelated build failures. You did so already yesterday: awesome, libchamplain ftbfs with an ICE in gcc-4.7 yeah for switching the default compiler doko: It looks like I'm going to take up your offer. Please fix that.

Re: Processed: blocks mksh on armel; also 2 pkgs on armhf which is a release arch now

[and now with a CC to the bug *sigh*] On Thu, 2011-11-24 at 23:27 +, Debian Bug Tracking System wrote: > Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > > > severity 633479 serious > Bug #633479 [gcc-4.6] ICE: gcc-4.6: ICE on armel+armhf with mksh, on armhf > with oss4-4.2-build2004-1 > S

Re: Processed: blocks mksh on armel; also 2 pkgs on armhf which is a release arch now

On Thu, 2011-11-24 at 23:27 +, Debian Bug Tracking System wrote: > > severity 633479 serious > Bug #633479 [gcc-4.6] ICE: gcc-4.6: ICE on armel+armhf with mksh, on armhf > with oss4-4.2-build2004-1 > Severity set to 'serious' from 'important' For reference, armhf is *not* yet a release archit

Bug#649307: gnat-4.6: FTBFS on kfreebsd-amd64 (gengtype: Internal error: abort in get_output_file_with_visibility, at gengtype.c:1998)

On Sun, 2011-11-20 at 15:29 +0100, Matthias Klose wrote: > On 11/19/2011 11:50 PM, Julien Cristau wrote: > > On Sat, Nov 19, 2011 at 23:32:48 +0100, Ludovic Brenta wrote: > > > >> retitle 649307 FTBFS on kfreebsd-amd64: gengtype: Internal error: abort in > >> get_output_file_with_visibility, at g

Bug#633754: gcj-4.6: FTBFS on m68k with segfault

severity 633754 important thanks On Wed, 13 Jul 2011 12:30:17 +, Thorsten Glaser wrote: Source: gcj-4.6 Version: 4.6.1-2 Severity: serious Justification: fails to build from source Building (bootstrapping) gcj-4.6 fails after 3/4 days at: [...] (gcj-4.6 was never built on m68k before, but

Bug#631817: libgcc1: missing link libgccc_s.so -> libgcc_s.so.1

On Mon, 2011-06-27 at 17:07 +0200, Ludovic Brenta wrote: > Further research indicates that the version of gcc-4.6 currently in > > testing is not yet multiarch-aware; the first version with multiarch was > > 4.6.0-12; the latest version is 4.6.0-14. It should have migrated to > > testing five d

Re: GCC-4.5 as the default for (at least some) architectures

On Wed, 2011-03-02 at 02:34 +0100, Matthias Klose wrote: > I'll make gcc-4.5 the default for (at least some) architectures within the > next > two weeks before more transitions start. GCC-4.5 is already used as the > default > compiler for almost any other distribution, so there shouldn't be man

Bug#622095: gccgo: uninstallable on armel

Package: gccgo Version: 4:4.6.0-3 Severity: serious Hi, gccgo is uninstallable on armel as it depends on gccgo-4.6, which is only built on amd64 and i386. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-gcc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas

Re: GMP transition: 4.3.2 to 5.0.1?

On Thu, 2011-02-24 at 22:15 +0100, Matthias Klose wrote: > On 24.02.2011 21:15, Adam D. Barratt wrote: > > [...] > >> Matthias also responded requesting: > >> > >> I see that both the runtime library and the -dev packages have > >> differe

Re: GMP transition: 4.3.2 to 5.0.1?

On Sat, 2011-02-19 at 04:48 -0600, Steve M. Robbins wrote: > On Sat, Feb 12, 2011 at 01:39:39PM +0000, Adam D. Barratt wrote: > > Have any of the reverse-dependencies been test-built against the new > > version? Does the move to 5.0.1 imply any source changes being required

Re: GMP transition: 4.3.2 to 5.0.1?

On Sun, 2011-02-06 at 12:39 -0600, Steve M. Robbins wrote: > Now that squeeze is out, I'd like to move from GMP 4 to GMP 5. The > latter was released upstream about a year ago and the gmp lists > aren't buzzing with outrageous bugs, so it appears stable enough. Looking at the package names of the

Bug#589389: FTBFS on ia64

clone 589398 -1 reassign -1 src:genius found -1 1.0.9-1 thanks Hi, On Sun, 2010-08-08 at 18:23 +0200, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote: > Short summary: genius FTBFS on ia64 (and only there) with this problem: > > cd ../lib && ../src/genius --maxerrors=0 --compile loader.gel > temp.cgel && > mv -f

Bug#589337: FTBFS on mips and sparc

On Tue, 2010-08-10 at 09:23 -0700, Steve Langasek wrote: > This is a bug in gcj, not in db4.8. It appears to now affect *all* > architectures, it just only manifested on sparc and mips because db4.8 was > later to build there and got caught by the introduction of this bug. Specifically, this does

Bug#456264: retitle 456264 to gcj: non-free man page included ..., user [EMAIL PROTECTED] ...

# Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.10.15 # Sorry... retitle 456264 gcj: non-free man page included retitle 465264 [debuild] --lintian-opts doesn't work user [EMAIL PROTECTED] usertags 465264 debuild -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "un

Bug#412104: Man page for gcc missing on Etch

On Fri, 2007-02-23 at 12:05 -0500, Bob Kline wrote: > Package: gcc-4.1 > > Installing gcc on Etch does not provide a man page. I've never seen a > system (including previous versions of Debian) where gcc didn't come > with a man page. You want gcc-doc, which is in contrib, and will install

Re: hello,what is the gcc problem? etch gcc 4.1 no stdio.h?

Hi, On Thu, 2006-10-12 at 05:58 -0400, lantian ai wrote: > grandi:~# cat hello.c > #include > int main() > { > printf("hello world\n"); > } > grandi:~# gcc -o hello hello.c > hello.c:1:19: error: stdio.h: No such file or directory > hello.c: In function 'main': > hello.c:4: warning: incompa

Bug#390694: [arm] Internal consistency failure while building OpenSER 1.1.0-3

Hi, On Mon, 2006-10-02 at 18:52 +0200, Matthias Klose wrote: > Julien BLACHE writes: > > Package: gcc-4.1 > > Version: 4.1.1-13 > > Severity: important > > > > Hi, > > > > gcc-4.1 bails out with an error while build OpenSER 1.1.0-3 on arm, see > > > >

Bug#389713: cpp-3.3: gcc package dependency problem

Hi, On Wednesday, September 27, 2006 11:46 AM, Klemens Kasemaa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Package: cpp-3.3 > Version: gcc-3.3-base Erm... that's not a version number of the package cpp-3.3. > Severity: important > Cannot install gcc because of dependency problem: > cpp-3.3: Depends: gcc-3.3

Re: g++ insanity??????

On Friday, December 02, 2005 12:00 PM, Michael Blansfield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hello, > > I am trying to install the g++-3.3 compiler on my linux box. But I > need to install all the supporting libraries, which I do fine until > I get to libstdc++5-3.3-dev which requires g++! What