reassign 935902 g++-9
affects 935902 libcppunit-dev
found 935902 9.2.1-12
close 935902 9.2.1-16
thanks
Hi,
On Thu, Oct 31, 2019 at 03:15:10PM +0100, Matthias Klose wrote:
> The comment about cppunit made me look at the cppunit package to find
> #935902, and yes, the test case is reproducible. So
Hi,
Am 31. Oktober 2019 15:15:10 MEZ schrieb Matthias Klose :
>And afaik there was no test rebuild for
>bullseye
>either.
Accepted cppunit 1.14.0-4 (source) into unstable
On July 26:
https://tracker.debian.org/news/1049803/accepted-cppunit-1140-4-source-into-unstable/
Buster release was 3 wee
Hi,
Am 31. Oktober 2019 15:15:10 MEZ schrieb Matthias Klose :
>On 29.10.19 15:09, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
>> On 2019-10-29 13:09:46 +0100, rene.engelh...@mailbox.org wrote:
>>> Am 29. Oktober 2019 12:49:44 MEZ schrieb Vincent Lefevre
>:
In case makefile magic triggers some rebuild, you can als
reassign 943401 gcc-9
found 943401 9.2.1-12
retitle 943401 libreoffice C++ Unit tests failing when built with gcc >=
9.2.1-12 (Failure instantiating exceptionprotector)
thanks
On Tue, Oct 29, 2019 at 03:09:50PM +0100, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> 1. Build smoketest with the old g++-9 / libstdc++6.
I
Hi,
Am 29. Oktober 2019 15:09:50 MEZ schrieb Vincent Lefevre :
>On 2019-10-29 13:09:46 +0100, rene.engelh...@mailbox.org wrote:
>> Am 29. Oktober 2019 12:49:44 MEZ schrieb Vincent Lefevre
>:
>> >In case makefile magic triggers some rebuild, you can also run the
>> >generated executable directly (w
Hi,
Am 29. Oktober 2019 12:49:44 MEZ schrieb Vincent Lefevre :
>In case makefile magic triggers some rebuild, you can also run the
>generated executable directly (with the right environment variables,
>in case this matters). If the programs honors the system ABI, this
>is allowed, and you'll effec
Hi again,
Am 29. Oktober 2019 11:26:41 MEZ schrieb rene.engelh...@mailbox.org:
>Hi,
>
>Am 29. Oktober 2019 10:59:07 MEZ schrieb Vincent Lefevre
>:
>> If you build LO
>>with an older gcc-9 version, upgrade libstdc++6, and run the test
>>again (without rebuilding it), does it fail?
>
>This is imposs
Hi,
Am 29. Oktober 2019 10:59:07 MEZ schrieb Vincent Lefevre :
> If you build LO
>with an older gcc-9 version, upgrade libstdc++6, and run the test
>again (without rebuilding it), does it fail?
This is impossible. This is a C++ unit test and the stuff assumes too much of
the build tree. You need
Hi,
On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 10:39:37PM +0100, Matthias Klose wrote:
> > but let's try to work together to fix the current situation.
That's what I tried, but... Disabling make check (as will be done)
is not "fix"ing but just hiding it.
> my moreinfo tag was removed, and I'm not interested in a b
Hi,
On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 10:39:37PM +0100, Matthias Klose wrote:
> On 28.10.19 22:17, Paul Gevers wrote:
> > Dear all,
> >
> > The visible progress on this bug report stopped several days ago. I'd
> > like to try an get it a bit further. I'm expecting frustration on all
> > sides,
>
> yes, an
Hi,
On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 10:17:49PM +0100, Paul Gevers wrote:
> Rene, I really appreciate the fact that libreoffice has an extensive
> test suite. But just to get options on the table can you please tell us
> how severe this particular failure is? In other words, how much is this
> telling you
Hi,
On Fri, Oct 25, 2019 at 06:48:45PM +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> > or adding information what is going wrong?
>
> See above. apt-get build-dep libreoffice, install the test
> depenencies of smoketest, debian/tests/smoketest in the chroot.
Or just build libreoffice as is in
On Fri, Oct 25, 2019 at 06:45:27PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
> Control: tags -1 + moreinfo
>
> On 25.10.19 18:33, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> > And since then I also can just reproduce it in a chroot, too.
>
> You didn't say that before.
I did in https://bugs.debian.org
Hi,
On Fri, Oct 25, 2019 at 06:33:13PM +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 25, 2019 at 06:25:43PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
> > [...] -12 was uploaded on Oct 23, but you say
> > that the tests started failing on Oct 21.
>
> No, the submitter did which clearly was w
Hi,
On Fri, Oct 25, 2019 at 06:25:43PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
> [...] -12 was uploaded on Oct 23, but you say
> that the tests started failing on Oct 21.
No, the submitter did which clearly was wrong. Please read the bug,
I said that at my very first message.
> So why do you think this is
Hi,
On Fri, Oct 25, 2019 at 05:59:53PM +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> > > OK, thanks, reassigning to src:gcc-9 (libstdc++6 for now) then.
> >
> > no. based on what rationale?
And to prevent said gcc-9 version from migrating, to not break something
else (no idea whether i
reassign 943401 libstdc++6
thanks
On Fri, Oct 25, 2019 at 05:53:54PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
> Control: reassign -1 src:libreoffice
>
> On 25.10.19 17:31, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> > reassign 943401 libstdc++6
> > found 943401 9.2.1-12
> > thanks
> >
> &g
reassign 943401 libstdc++6
found 943401 9.2.1-12
thanks
Hi,
On Fri, Oct 25, 2019 at 12:21:11PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
> > I guess I need to disable make check to get round this.. (Unless someone
> > at GCC tells me what change libstdc++6(?) might have to cause this or
> > some other debuggi
elp
thanks
Hi,
On Thu, Oct 24, 2019 at 07:21:47PM +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 24, 2019 at 06:19:55PM +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> > So they might be just flaky? That is not new (in buildd builds they also
> > just som
>
> So, the last exception one (which I
[ Cc'ing the GCC maintainers ]
Hi,
On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 03:47:50PM +0200, Sorin Manolache wrote:
> When compiling a program with g++-9 (4:9.2.1-3) and linking with libcppunit
> then I get a segfault if the program uses std::stack.
Hrmpf.
> For example:
>
> void f() {
> std::stack s1;
>
On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 08:58:01PM +0100, Ondřej Surý wrote:
> Control: severity -1 important
> Control: reassign -1 gcc-7
> Control: forcemerge 882415 -1
>
> This has been reported as bug in gcc-7 and I am taking doko's suggestion
> and downgrading the -O3 to -O2 meanwhile in 1:10.1.29-3 as a tem
reassign 823145 src:libreoffice
retitle 823145 FTBFS with gcc 6: -isystem /usr/include in KDE4_CFLAGS breaks
includes
thanks
Hi,
On Sun, May 08, 2016 at 01:23:32PM +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> Jup. See "checking for KDE4 headers... /usr/include". Which ends up as
>
>
On Sun, May 08, 2016 at 01:05:47PM +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> > By the way, is there any particular reason why LibreOffice buildsystem uses
> > -isystem /usr/include?
>
> Probably some bug where it just adds whatever -I it finds (and be it
> /usr/include, which shouldn
Hi,
On Tue, May 03, 2016 at 09:32:55PM +0300, Dmitry Shachnev wrote:
> > In file included from /usr/include/c++/6/bits/stl_algo.h:59:0,
> > from /usr/include/c++/6/algorithm:62,
> > from /usr/include/qt4/QtCore/qglobal.h:68,
> > from /usr/include/
notfound 812287 0.1.6-1
close 812287
thanks
Hi,
On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 08:03:11PM -0800, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
> Unfortunately, it's not clear from the log why the build failed.
> It's possible there's a bug in this package or in GCC. It's also
Seems as GCC. See below.
> possible I reported
tag 811686 + pending
thanks
Hi,
On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 04:58:11PM -0800, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
> Note that only the first error is reported; there might be more. You
There definitely are. (And some subtle ones, reading from upstreams commits
for 5.2.x)
> > /<>/basebmp/source/bitmapdevice.cx
reassign 804358 python-guiqwt
found 804358 2.3.1-1
thanks
[ I am not the gcc/libstdc++6 maintainer ]
Hi,
On Sat, Nov 07, 2015 at 06:24:05PM +, Debian Bug Tracking System wrote:
> Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
>
> > reassign 804358 libstdc++6
> Bug #804358 [python-guiqwt] I
Package: libstdc++6
Version: 5.2.1-13
Severity: important
Hi,
$ dpkg --info libstdc++6_5.2.1-13_ppc64el.deb | grep Breaks
Breaks: [...], libreoffice-core (<= 1:4.4.4-1), [...]
As said on IRC I has an at job scheduled for yesterday 13:00 to upload 4.4.5-1.
Which ran but since dak was broken for
Hi,
I think that libgcj10 is simply an error. There is no >= 4.7.0 of that,
neither of libgcj12.
$ rmadison libgcj10 libgcj11 libgcj12 libgcj13
libgcj10 | 4.4.5-2 | squeeze | amd64, armel, i386, ia64, kfreebsd-amd64,
kfreebsd-i386, mips, mipsel, powerpc, s390, sparc
libgcj10 | 4.4.7-1 | wheez
Hi,
On Sat, Feb 25, 2012 at 02:16:09PM +, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:
> > # file /usr/share/libreoffice/sdk/classes/win/unowinreg.dll
> > /usr/share/libreoffice/sdk/classes/win/unowinreg.dll: PE32 executable (DLL)
> > (console) Intel 80386 (stripped to external PDB), for MS Windows
>
Hi,
On Sat, Feb 25, 2012 at 01:49:02PM +, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:
> it's even more hilarious than that: it's actually because java can't
> access windows registry functions, so someone wrote a c-based DLL
> which java *can* bind to. the fact that the end-result of the
Yes, that
Hi,
> Libreoffice hasn't yet been built on armhf. I consider libreoffice to be
> a reasonablly important package and one that we need to get in before we
> can claim we have a reasonablly complete port.
And the segfault described on
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/libreoffice/+bug/90
tch
+++ gcc-4.6-4.6.1/debian/rules.patch
@@ -81,6 +81,7 @@
pr49944 \
libjava-r176199 \
gcc-cloog-dl \
+ pr50442 \
$(if $(filter yes, $(DEB_CROSS)),,gcc-print-file-name) \
# libstdc++-nothumb-check \
diff -u gcc-4.6-4.6.1/debian/changelog gcc-4.6-4.6.1/debian/changelog
--- gcc-4.6-4.6
Package: libgcj-bc
Version: 4.4.5-7
Severity: serious
(sid)root@frodo:/# apt-get dist-upgrade
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree
Reading state information... Done
Calculating upgrade... Done
The following packages have been kept back:
libgcj-bc
0 upgraded, 0 newly installed,
Hi,
On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 07:51:37PM +0100, Lionel Elie Mamane wrote:
> It seems the information he is missing to properly set dependencies
> for libreoffice-gcj (and its predecessor openoffice.org-gcj) is which
> version of gcj-jre/java-gcj-compat is the right one. libreoffice-gcj
> already dep
Hi,
On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 07:51:37PM +0100, Lionel Elie Mamane wrote:
> - the version of _lenny_ of java-gcj-compat is installed (from gcc
>4.3.2, libgcj9)
Where we again are in your broken system config with stable being on
highest priio but your system being (almost) completely unstable
Hi,
On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 05:07:54PM +0100, Matthias Klose wrote:
> the package is there and it is called libgcj-bc. See dh_nativejava
> how to build binary code for jar files. As long as packages are
> built against libgcj-bc, there is no need to depend against the
> "right" version of gcj/gij.
reassign 609659 gij
thanks
On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 05:27:01PM +0100, Matthias Klose wrote:
> >This bug is an another bug by Lionel, not (just) about the dependency. Read
> >it.
> >It requests a fallback to non-native if the mismatch happens.
>
> which mismatch?
The condition causing "libgcj lin
Hi,
On Fri, Jun 04, 2010 at 03:38:41PM +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> So the .shlibs adds a dependency on a non-existing version and thus
> makes built -gcj packages uninstallable.
Thankfully any upload of gcc-defaults would most probably automagically
fix this, but I'd still prefe
Package: libgcj-bc
Version: 4.4.4-1
Severity: serious
I was just testing OpenOffice.org 1:3.2.1-1 (built on uptodate sid):
r...@frodo:~/Debian/Pakete/openoffice.org$ sudo dpkg -i
openoffice.org-gcj_3.2.1-1_amd64.deb
Selecting previously deselected package openoffice.org-gcj.
(Reading database .
retitle 580148 gcj: libgcj.spec: No such file or directory
thanks
On Thu, May 06, 2010 at 12:53:16PM +0200, Denis Barbier wrote:
> I do not have access to those boxes, but IMHO gcj does not find
> libgcj.spec because gcj from gcj-4.4-jdk_4.4.4-1 looks for
> /usr/lib/gcc/s390-linux-gnu/4.4.4/libgcj
severity 580148 serious
thanks
On Wed, May 05, 2010 at 06:45:25PM +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> On Wed, May 05, 2010 at 05:53:18PM +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Wed, May 05, 2010 at 05:38:31PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
> > > tag 580148 + morein
On Wed, May 05, 2010 at 05:53:18PM +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, May 05, 2010 at 05:38:31PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
> > tag 580148 + moreinfo
> > thanks
>
> Which info do you need? I can try on my armel sid when the currently
> running testbu
Hi,
On Wed, May 05, 2010 at 05:38:31PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
> tag 580148 + moreinfo
> thanks
Which info do you need? I can try on my armel sid when the currently
running testbuild for an other thing is over.
> according to
> http://packages.debian.org/search?searchon=contents&keywords=li
Hi,
On Mon, May 03, 2010 at 11:07:10PM +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> Seen this on the s390 build of openoffice.org 1:3.2.0-9
> (https://buildd.debian.org/fetch.cgi?pkg=openoffice.org&arch=s390&ver=1%3A3.2.0-9&stamp=1272919681&file=log&as=raw):
>
> [...]
>
Package: gcj-4.4-jdk
Version: 4.4.4-1
Severity: grave
Hi,
Seen this on the s390 build of openoffice.org 1:3.2.0-9
(https://buildd.debian.org/fetch.cgi?pkg=openoffice.org&arch=s390&ver=1%3A3.2.0-9&stamp=1272919681&file=log&as=raw):
[...]
AOT_MAKEFLAGS=-j1 aot-compile -L /usr/lib/gcj/openo
[ @ -sparc/-openoffice: It goes about the repeated and random(!) build
failures and ICEs of OOo on sparc, see buildd.d.o ]
Hi again,
On Tue, Sep 08, 2009 at 09:36:31AM +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 06, 2009 at 01:27:09PM +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> > 1) Martin, can y
Hi,
Daniel Schepler wrote:
> The problem is that neither gcj, gcj-jdk, nor java-gcj-compat-dev depends on
> gcj-4.3 anymore. An "apt-get install default-jdk-builddep gcj-4.3" works
> fine
> in a chroot. So it should be enough just to add gcj-4.3 as a dependency of
> one of those packages.
W
unmerge 529402
reopen 529402
thanks
Debian Bug Tracking System wrote:
> reassign 529402 libgcj-common
> forcemerge 529412 529402
> forcemerge 529402 529725
> thanks
>
> Version: 1:4.4.0-6
>
Not really.
See e.g.
https://buildd.debian.org/fetch.cgi?pkg=openoffice.org;ver=1%3A3.1.0-3;arch=i386;s
Package: libgcj-common
Version: 1:4.4.0-4
Package: java-gcj-compat-dev
Version: 1.0.80-2
Severity: serious
Selecting previously deselected package libgcj-common.
Unpacking libgcj-common (from .../libgcj-common_1%3a4.4.0-4_all.deb) ...
[...]
Selecting previously deselected package java-gcj-compat-dev.
Unpacking java-gcj-compat-dev (from ..
Hi,
Matthias Klose wrote:
> no, this is likely a bug in OOo. before re-assigning this again:
>
> - please find out if it is fixed in 3.0.x (apparently it is)
Yes.
> - please find out if it is fixed in 2.4.2 (apparently you are not
>interested in it).
Apparently not. Someone from Gentoo s
reassign 514830 gcc-4.3
found 514830 4.3.2-4
tag 514830 + sid
severity 514830 important
thanks
Hi,
Matthias Klose wrote:
> reassign 514830 openoffice.org
> thanks
No. The bug is worked around for Debian in lenny. Please don't give the OOo
packages a RC bug right now.
Set it to important or what
clone 513743 -1
reassign -1 gcc-4.3
reopen -1
# maybe before, but that's the first version which appears in a buildog
# of a build causing a broken version
found -1 4.3.2-4
thanks
Hi,
ok, OOo is now fixed in testing by a bin-NMU with testings gcc (and that's
what will be in lenny), but it still i
# Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.10.35lenny1
# seems this was forgotten to be reopened aft
reopen 504323
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-gcc-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
notfixed 504323 1:3.0.1~rc1-2
thanks
Rene Engelhard wrote:
> BTW; it works for me with 3.0.1 on amd64... Florian, can you confirm?
No, sorry, no idea why it worked before I wrote this, but it actually
doesn't...
Grüße/Regards,
René
--
.''`. René Engelhard -- Debian G
found 504323 1:2.4.1-7
close 504323 1:3.0.1~rc1-2
thanks
Hi,
Kay Ramme - Sun Germany - Hamburg wrote:
> seems to be an incompatibility of libgcc_s . Could you provide the
> memory map of the process and may be some debug info for the bridge as
> well?
If you tell me/Florian how to do it/what
tag 504323 - moreinfo
tag 504323 - unreproducible
retitle 504323 openoffice.org-core: Segmentation fault at startup with gcc 4.4
libs
forwarded 504323 d...@udk.openoffice.org
thanks
[ d...@udk: as usual, please Cc all involved! ]
Hi,
Florian Goujeon wrote:
> It was indeed my mistake. I'm workin
Package: gcj, gij, libgcj-bc
Version: 4:4.3.0-7
Severity: serious
$ apt-cache show gcj | grep Depends
Depends: cpp (>= 4:4.3.0-8), gij (>= 4:4.3.0-8), gcj-4.3 (>= 4.3.0-5)
gcj-4.3 |4.3.0-3 | testing | source, amd64, armel, i386, ia64,
mips, mipsel, powerpc, s390, sparc
gcj-4.3 |
clone 432191 -1 -2
reassign -1 gcj-4.2
reassign -2 gcj-4.3
block 478760 by -2
thanks
Hi Matthias,
you asked in January:
> still missing more information; please check with gij-4.3/gcj-4.3
> instead.
Also happened with 4.2, afair. (afair told you on IRC)
Yes, it still happens, see also http://bu
Package: ftp.debian.org
Severity: normal
gcc-defaults (1.70) unstable; urgency=low
[Matthias Klose]
* /usr/share/gcj/debian_defaults: Remove alpha, arm, hppa from
gcj_archs, remove alpha from gcj_native_archs, add armel to
gcj_archs and gcj_native_archs.
* Make GCC-4.3 the default o
Package: java-gcj-compat-dev
Version: 1.0.78-1
Severity: important
Hi,
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ aot-compile
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/usr/bin/aot-compile", line 16, in
import aotcompile
ImportError: No module named aotcompile
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ apt-file search aotcompile.py
Hi,
Matthias Klose wrote:
> Rene Engelhard writes:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Matthias Klose wrote:
> > > no, I don't care anymore about "delays" in NEW after having to wait
> > > about 12 or 13 days for a new binary with the last gcj-4.2 upload. If
&
Hi,
Matthias Klose wrote:
> no, I don't care anymore about "delays" in NEW after having to wait
> about 12 or 13 days for a new binary with the last gcj-4.2 upload. If
> ftp-masters did make the decision that new binary packages have to
> land in NEW, then they should process them in time. What do
Matthias Klose wrote:
> Rene Engelhard writes:
> > Package: java-gcj-compat-dev
> > Version: 1.0.76-2
> > Severity: serious
>
> looks like a newbie gone wild and filing bug reports without looking
> into NEW first.
Irrelevant.
a) I am not a newbie. I just know
Package: java-gcj-compat-dev
Version: 1.0.76-2
Severity: serious
# apt-get install java-gcj-compat-dev
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree
Reading state information... Done
Some packages could not be installed. This may mean that you have
requested an impossible situation or if
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Package: gcj-4.1
Version: 4.1.2-12
Severity: important
(as requsted)
newer gcj-4.1s make OOos Java assistants simply hangs on ppc when you
choose them. This happens with and without -gcj and it
works with the Oo 2.2.1 backport on etch with etchs gcj
Matthias Klose wrote:
> Rene Engelhard writes:
> > please add lib64 symlink
>
> why? you should fix the build system to use lib, not lib64.
I disagree. lib64 is a common and normal assumption.
> > Please add a symlink lib64 -> lib, ad one for /lib64 -> /lib and
>
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Rene Engelhard wrote:
> Rene Engelhard wrote:
> > > file does not exist: /usr/lib/jvm/java-1.4.2-gcj-4.1-1.4.2.0/lib/libgij.so
> > > file does not exist: /usr/lib/jvm/java-1.4.2-gcj-4.1-1.4.2.0/lib/libgcj.so
> > > file d
Package: java-gcj-compat,java-gcj-compat-dev
Version: 1.0.65-10
Severity: important
Hi,
while building OOo (on amd64):
Making: ../../unxlngx6.pro/lib/libofficebean.so
ccache g++ -Wl,-z,combreloc -Wl,-z,defs -Wl,-rpath,'$ORIGIN'
-Wl,--hash-style=gnu -shared -L../../unxlngx6.pro/lib -L../lib
-L/
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Rene Engelhard wrote:
> Richte java-gcj-compat-dev ein (1.0.65-10) ...
> file does not exist: /usr/lib/jvm/java-1.4.2-gcj-4.1-1.4.2.0/lib/libgij.so
> file does not exist: /usr/lib/jvm/java-1.4.2-gcj-4.1-1.4.2.0/lib/libgcj.so
> file do
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Rene Engelhard wrote:
> > file does not exist: /usr/lib/jvm/java-1.4.2-gcj-4.1-1.4.2.0/lib/libgij.so
> > file does not exist: /usr/lib/jvm/java-1.4.2-gcj-4.1-1.4.2.0/lib/libgcj.so
> > file does not exist:
> > /usr/lib/jvm/ja
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
clone 421301 -1
severity -1 important
retitle -1 needs update for new gcj-4.1
reassign -1 java-gcj-compat-dev
thanks
Rene Engelhard wrote:
> java-gcj-compat-dev does excpects it on another path:
> lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 27 2007-04-26 13:50
Package: gcj-4.1
Version: 4.1.2-4
Severity: serious
(as already mentioned on IRC).
the new gcj-4.1 apparently changed location of jawt (and other sos):
libgcj7-1-awt: /usr/lib/gcj-4.1-71/libjawt.so
java-gcj-compat-dev does excpects it on another path:
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 27 2007-04-26 13:50
Package: java-gcj-compat-dev
Version: 1.0.65-10
Severity: serious
Hi,
Richte java-gcj-compat-dev ein (1.0.65-10) ...
file does not exist: /usr/lib/jvm/java-1.4.2-gcj-4.1-1.4.2.0/lib/libgij.so
file does not exist: /usr/lib/jvm/java-1.4.2-gcj-4.1-1.4.2.0/lib/libgcj.so
file does not exist: /usr/lib/
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
reopen 389539
thanks
Hi,
Unpacking java-gcj-compat (from .../java-gcj-compat_1.0.65-2_sparc.deb) ...
dpkg: error processing
/var/cache/apt/archives/java-gcj-compat_1.0.65-2_sparc.deb (--unpack):
trying to overwrite `/usr/bin/rebuild-gcj-db', which
Package: java-gcj-compat-dev
Version: 1.0.52-0
Severity: important
Tags: experimental
Hi,
I just tried bulding OOo on sparc with Java (and therefore with
java-gcj-compat-dev from experimental).
The configure check for jni.h failed, though because jni.h #include's
jni_md.h for which there is no s
Package: g++-4.0
Severity: important
ccache g++ -fsigned-char -fmessage-length=0 -c -I. -I. -I../inc -I../../inc
-I../../unx/inc -I../../unxlngppc.pro/inc -I.
-I/build/rene/openoffice.org2-1.9.114/ooo-build/build/src680-m114/solver/680/unxlngppc.pro/inc/stl
-I/build/rene/openoffice.org2-1.9.1
Package: g++-4.0
Version: 4.0.0-1
Severity: important
Tags: experimental
Hi,
ccache g++-4.0 -fsigned-char -fmessage-length=0 -c -I. -I. -I../inc
-I../../inc -I../../unx/inc -I../../unxlngppc.pro/inc -I.
-I/home/rene/OpenOffice.org/SRC680_m98/solver/680/unxlngppc.pro/inc/stl
-I/home/rene/OpenOffi
Package: gcc-4.0
Severity: serious
Tags: experimental
[...]
/bin/sh ./libtool --mode=compile /home/rene/gcc-4.0-4.0.0/build/gcc/xgcc
-B/home/rene/gcc-4.0-4.0.0/build/gcc/ -B/usr/powerpc-linux/bin/
-B/usr/powerpc-linux/lib/ -isystem /usr/powerpc-linux/include -isystem
/usr/powerpc-linux/sys-include
Package: libgcj6-dev
Severity: serious
Tags: experimental
[ sorry, LANG="de_DE" ]
Entpacke libgcj6-dev (aus .../libgcj6-dev_4.0-0pre4_i386.deb) ...
dpkg: Fehler beim Bearbeiten von
/var/cache/apt/archives/libgcj6-dev_4.0-0pre4_i386.deb (--unpack):
versuche »/usr/lib/libgcj.a« zu überschreiben, w
Daniel Burrows wrote:
> gcc-3.4 is part of base, since it provides libgcc1 now.
and gcc-3.3 also because of libstdc++5...
Grüße/Regards,
René
--
.''`. René Engelhard -- Debian GNU/Linux Developer
: :' : http://www.debian.org | http://people.debian.org/~rene/
`. `' [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Gnu
Package: gcc-defaults
Version: 1.11
Severity: normal
Hi,
gcc-defaults still produce 3.3.2-x gcc/g++/.. packages which confuses
even skilled developers.
It should be updated to be versioned 3.3.3 as that ís the real gcc
version..
-- System Information:
Debian Release: testing/unstable
APT pref
Hi Matthias,
Matthias Klose wrote:
> as I wrote on Fri, 23 May 2003 10:39:48 +0200, I am unable to
> reproduce this report. Is somebody else able to confirm this report?
I unfortunately rm'ed the patches I used for 1.0.3 to get it
built to this point with g++ 3.3 from my disk since we a) were abo
Package: gcc-3.3
Version: 1:3.3-2
Severity: important
ccache gcc -D__KERNEL__ -I/usr/src/Linux/linux-2.4.20-apm/include -Wall
-Wstrict-prototypes -Wno-trigraphs -O2 -fno-strict-aliasing -fno-common
-fomit-frame-pointer -pipe -mpreferred-stack-boundary=2 -march=i686 -nostdinc
-iwithprefix incl
Hi,
Matthias Klose wrote:
> Rene Engelhard writes:
> > Package: g++-3.3
> > Version: 1:3.3-2
> > Severity: important
>
> > Running the line with g++ -E gives nothing..
>
> no output at all?
Right.
Regards,
Rene
pgpYax3OnoLvl.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Package: g++-3.3
Version: 1:3.3-2
Severity: important
Making: ../../../unxlngi4.pro/slo/urp_reader.obj
ccache g++ -fmessage-length=0 -c -I. -I. -I../inc -I../../../inc
-I../../../unx/inc -I../../../unxlngi4.pro/inc -I.
-I/home/rene/Debian/Pakete/OpenOffice.org/Hauptpaket/openoffice.org-1.0.3/bui
Hi,
during OOo's compilation the following is done:
ccache g++ -fmessage-length=0 -c -I. -I. -I../inc -I../../../inc
-I../../../unx/inc -I../../../unxlngi4.pro/inc -I.
-I/home/rene/Debian/Pakete/OpenOffice.org/Hauptpaket/openoffice.org-1.0.3/build-tree/oo_1.0.3_src/solver/641/unxlngi4.pro/inc/s
Package: g++-3.3
Version: 1:3.3-2
Severity: important
Tags: sid
Hi,
Compiling OpenOffice.org 1.0.3 with the g++ 3.3 suport patches
(IZ 13400) with g++ 3.3 gives us the following ICE:
http://people.debian.org/~rene/openoffice.org/oo103gcc3patchesice
OK, a talk on IRC gave some info (thanks Andre
ibc-dev, libc6-dev
Regards,
Rene
--
.''`. Rene Engelhard -- Debian GNU/Linux Developer
: :' : http://www.debian.org | http://people.debian.org/~rene/
`. `' [EMAIL PROTECTED] | GnuPG-Key ID: 248AEB73
`- Fingerprint: 41FA F208 28D4 7CA5 19BB 7AD9 F859 90B0 248A EB73
Hi,
Matthias Klose wrote:
> Rene Engelhard writes:
> > Package: gcc-2.95
> > Version: 1:2.95.4-16
> > Severity: serious
> >
> > Hallo Matthias,
> >
> > I am not the buildd admin of arm but since there was no bug filed to
> > today I do it:
&g
.951:2.95.4-16 The GNU C preprocessor.
ii gcc 3:3.2.2-0The GNU C compiler.
ii libc6 2.3.1-14 GNU C Library: Shared libraries an
-- no debconf information
--
.''`. Rene Engelhard -- Debian GNU/Linux Develo
92 matches
Mail list logo
