I think you should apply the patch, because the build daemons use gcc 3.3
for building the packages. I can provide an indirect test to the patch in
the next upload of the octave2.1 package. In the last upload, I changed a
CFLAG from -O1 to -O0 for m68k and the compilation succeeded (I
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/debian-68k/2005/02/msg00049.html
that message has another (.extbf) patch in
* Matthias Klose [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2005-03-02 10:42]:
I'm applying the patch for 3.4 now, debian-m68k, should the patch
applied without testing to 3.3 as well?
I think you should apply the patch, because the build daemons use gcc 3.3
for building the packages. I can provide an indirect test
On Wed, Mar 02, 2005 at 11:16:35AM +0100, Rafael Laboissiere wrote:
* Matthias Klose [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2005-03-02 10:42]:
I'm applying the patch for 3.4 now, debian-m68k, should the patch
applied without testing to 3.3 as well?
I think you should apply the patch, because the build
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
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
6 matches
Mail list logo
