d bug reports. We are sorry
> that we couldn't deal with your issue properly.
>
> For details on the removal, please see https://bugs.debian.org/1076502
Bug still relevant, reopening and reassigning. Keeping the original
bug report below for context.
> Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2014 2
patch that removes references to these obsolete
arches.
Thanks,
Guillem
From 6a26179c55840f1bcd494b302cd3d213c4d85cfa Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Guillem Jover
Date: Sun, 26 Nov 2023 00:16:51 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] Remove references to obsolete m32r and tilegx arches
Support for these arches
patch that removes references to these obsolete
arches.
Thanks,
Guillem
From c3ce5e819640376b2728077257383bce9de6d55a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Guillem Jover
Date: Sun, 26 Nov 2023 00:16:51 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] Remove references to obsolete m32r and tilegx arches
Support for these arches
patch that removes references to these obsolete
arches.
Thanks,
Guillem
From 774a10b382999154a50710417e1721805fea0fd0 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Guillem Jover
Date: Sun, 26 Nov 2023 00:16:51 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] Remove references to obsolete m32r and tilegx arches
Support for these arches
patch that removes references to these obsolete
arches.
Thanks,
Guillem
From 7e46f4375d3aeb2a386edfd6b87c2c4f328016f6 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Guillem Jover
Date: Sun, 26 Nov 2023 00:16:51 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] Remove references to obsolete m32r and tilegx arches
Support for these arches
patch that removes references to these obsolete
arches.
Thanks,
Guillem
From 4374a74a6f4f48d2bdf59561a8dfbf751bc0d629 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Guillem Jover
Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2023 23:44:48 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] Remove references to obsolete m32r and tilegx arches
Support for these arches got
Hi!
On Tue, 2023-04-18 at 17:54:20 -0500, G. Branden Robinson wrote:
> At 2023-04-18T16:07:45+0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
> > TL;DR: I want to propose a GCC 14 change which will impact
> > distributions, so I'd like to gather some feedback from Debian.
> > I would appreciate some discussion on th
Control: reopen -1
Control: reassign -1 gcc-9,gcc-10,gcc-11
On Sat, 2021-02-13 at 13:07:12 +, Debian FTP Masters wrote:
> Version: 1:8.4.0-7+rm
> as the package gcc-8 has just been removed from the Debian archive
> unstable we hereby close the associated bug reports. We are sorry
> that we c
Control: retitle -1 libgcc1: Can switch to use new Allow-Internal-Symbol-Groups
for aeabi symbols
On Wed, 2014-01-15 at 20:49:30 +0100, Guillem Jover wrote:
> Package: libgcc1
> Version: 1:4.8.2-13
> Severity: wishlist
>
> With dpkg-dev 1.17.6, there's a new symbols file
Control: tags -1 - moreinfo
Control: reassign -1 gcc-7
Control: retitle -1 gcc: Tune default --param ggc-min-expand for 32-bit arches
Hi!
[ Please, feel free to clone for every supported gcc, if necessary. ]
On Mon, 2017-11-27 at 14:03:57 +, James Cowgill wrote:
> On 26/11/17 02:41, Guil
Sun, 2017-09-10 at 22:12:13 +0100, Dimitri John Ledkov wrote:
> On 10 September 2017 at 15:03, Guillem Jover wrote:
> > On Thu, 2017-09-07 at 16:16:49 +0100, Dimitri John Ledkov wrote:
> >> Package: dpkg
> >> Version: 1.18.24
> >> Severity: important
> >
&
Control: reassign -1 gcc-6
Control: severity -1 serious
Control: affects -1 petsc
Control: affects -1 cmake
Control: affects 848129 - petsc
Hi!
On Fri, 2017-02-03 at 15:03:34 +, James Clarke wrote:
> Package: gcc-6, dpkg-dev
> Severity: important
> X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-ports-de...@lists.aliot
Hi!
On Thu, 2016-11-24 at 14:52:33 +, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> clone 845193 -1
> reassign -1 dpkg
> retitle -1 dpkg: please do not add -specs= flags only on some architectures
> thanks
I'm afraid I'll have to wontfix this because it is not really
implementable. See belo
Control: reassign -1 gcc-6
[ Leaving enough context for gcc maintainers. ]
On Tue, 2016-08-09 at 14:08:45 +0200, Ximin Luo wrote:
> Package: dpkg-dev
> Version: 1.18.10
> Severity: wishlist
> Many software packages (e.g. see #833846) like to set optimisation
> flags based on autodetecting CPU fe
Hi!
On Fri, 2015-07-10 at 09:22:25 +0200, Basile Starynkevitch wrote:
> How can a plugin call existing GCC functions, e.g. walk_gimple_seq
> declared in
> /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-linux-gnu/5/plugin/include/gimple-walk.h and
> implemented inside cc1 ?
I've not checked how plugins are implemented in gc
Hi!
On Thu, 2015-04-30 at 17:43:00 -0300, Daniel Serpell wrote:
> Package: gcc-5
> Version: 5.1.1-2
> Severity: wishlist
> Currently, gcc-5 packages are really big because the files under
> /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-linux-gnu/5 are not stripped, and each one of
> lto1, cc1 and cc1plus is about 130MB.
>
Package: libgcc1
Version: 1:4.8.2-13
Severity: wishlist
With dpkg-dev 1.17.6, there's a new symbols file field named
Ignore-Blacklist-Groups that can be used by the toolchain packages to
ignore the entire blacklist group for the aeabi symbols, which are now
blacklisted by regex instead of by an ex
Package: libmudflap0-4.8-dev
Version: 4.8.1-9
Severity: wishlist
Hi!
The libmudflap0-4.8-dev:amd64 package (for example) ships the 32 and x32
multilib alternatives, something that is done with distinct packages
for all other multilib enabled packages.
As you are intent on supporting multilib, co
On Wed, 2012-06-13 at 08:10:02 +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> On Wed, 13 Jun 2012, Guillem Jover wrote:
> > On Wed, 2012-06-13 at 07:06:47 +0200, Guillem Jover wrote:
> > > I've actually have had this on my TODO to deal with, which I found
> > > when checking li
reassign 677139 libgcc1
retitle 677139 libgcc1: Missing entries in symbols file on EABI arches
thanks
Sorry, it seems I misremembered the issue here!
On Wed, 2012-06-13 at 07:06:47 +0200, Guillem Jover wrote:
> On Mon, 2012-06-11 at 20:16:51 +0200, Bernhard R. Link wrote:
> > Package
reassign 677139 dpkg-dev
retitle dpkg-shlibdeps: Should blacklist __aeabi_unwind_cpp_pr1@GCC_3.5
thanks
On Mon, 2012-06-11 at 20:16:51 +0200, Bernhard R. Link wrote:
> Package: gcc-4.6
> Version: 4.6.2-6
>
> Some large number of packages (I'd guess around 700 +/- 200 source packages)
> generates
Hi!
On Sat, 2011-11-19 at 22:42:11 +, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> The i386 architecture was the first in Linux and in Debian, but we have
> long since dropped support for the original i386-compatible processors
> and now require a minimum of a 486-class processor.
>
> I think it is time to increas
Hi,
[ I don't have a real opinion yet on the initial patch and this
changes proposed, will try to get to this on Sunday. ]
On Sat, 2007-12-08 at 19:01:14 +, Neil Williams wrote:
> Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> > On Wed, 05 Dec 2007, Neil Williams wrote:
> >> My first patch did exactly that - and
23 matches
Mail list logo
