On Wed, Mar 02, 2005 at 10:42:54AM +0100, Matthias Klose wrote:
Richard Zidlicky writes:
Hi,
the problem has been already discussed some time
ago upstream, now ocatve triggered the bug so
it seems the fix should be backported to 3.3
octave problem
http://lists.debian.org
Hi,
the problem has been already discussed some time
ago upstream, now ocatve triggered the bug so
it seems the fix should be backported to 3.3
octave problem
http://lists.debian.org/debian-68k/2005/02/msg00049.html
gcc discussion
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2004-03/msg00940.html
On Fri, Jan 24, 2003 at 02:28:31PM -0800, Jeff Bailey wrote:
I don't know if it's significant, but upstream announced .18 today with
the following changelog:
Changes from binutils 2.13.90.0.16:
...
5. Fix
On Fri, Jan 24, 2003 at 11:34:34AM +0900, GOTO Masanori wrote:
which binutils are used? Some older versions had bugs that were
only triggered by gcc-3.2
At least I tested with binutils 2.13.90.0.16-1.
But, I don't know the version number of the buildd environment.
seems to be the
On Wed, Jan 22, 2003 at 06:43:55AM +0900, GOTO Masanori wrote:
On Sun, Jan 19, 2003 at 07:48:04PM -0800, Jeff Bailey wrote:
I haven't seen mention of it on this list, so I wanted to bring it up -
Bug #175526 against glibc is m68k specific.
interesting. I am running glibc-2.3 and
On Tue, Oct 29, 2002 at 06:10:57PM +0100, Yann Dirson wrote:
On Mon, Oct 21, 2002 at 09:43:05PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
Yann Dirson writes:
I have several packages (e2fsprogs, bigloo) that fail to build on
m68k, apparently due to one or more gcc bug(s). Maybe that's the same
as
6 matches
Mail list logo
