How was compiled cssc on ia64, and other issues
Hi, The excuses file for cssc tells it's no promoted because it shows a dep on gcc-3.1, which I don't feel is normal. I found out that the ia64 binary says: Depends: libc6.1 (>= 2.2.4-4), libgcc1 (>= 1:3.1), libstdc++3 (>= 1:3.0.3-1) Whereas I had put in the build-deps " g++-3.0 [ia64]", and the rules file contain code to use 3.0, not 3.1: # See bug #145859 CONFIGURE_ENV= ifeq ($(shell dpkg-architecture -qDEB_BUILD_ARCH),ia64) CONFIGURE_ENV='CCC=g++-3.0' endif Is it that "gcc" now points to "gcc-3.1" by default on ia64 ? Should I remove the hack because g++ would also be g++-3.1 ? What's silly about that is that gcc-3.1 only seems to be held out of testing because an error in copyright file (and maybe because binutils is held, which seems to come from an arm-specific patch not being applicable any more)... Are these issues to be settled in the near future ? Regards, -- Yann Dirson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.alcove.com/ Technical support managerResponsable de l'assistance technique Senior Free-Software Consultant Consultant senior en Logiciels Libres Debian developer ([EMAIL PROTECTED])Développeur Debian -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: How was compiled cssc on ia64, and other issues
Yann Dirson writes: > Hi, > > The excuses file for cssc tells it's no promoted because it shows a > dep on gcc-3.1, which I don't feel is normal. I found out that the > ia64 binary says: > > Depends: libc6.1 (>= 2.2.4-4), libgcc1 (>= 1:3.1), libstdc++3 (>= 1:3.0.3-1) > > Whereas I had put in the build-deps " g++-3.0 [ia64]", and the rules > file contain code to use 3.0, not 3.1: The shared libgcc1 is built by gcc-3.0 and gcc-3.1. The libgcc1 package is built from the gcc-3.1 sources. > Is it that "gcc" now points to "gcc-3.1" by default on ia64 ? Not yet. > Should I remove the hack because g++ would also be g++-3.1 ? Not before g++-3.2 becomes the default compiler. > What's silly about that is that gcc-3.1 only seems to be held out of > testing because an error in copyright file (and maybe because binutils > is held, which seems to come from an arm-specific patch not being > applicable any more)... Are these issues to be settled in the near > future ? Maybe it's better to keep out 3.1 out of testing at all. gcc-3.2 will be released soon (3.2 == 3.1.1 + g++ ABI changes). the error in the copyright file is not the only reason, the build of the sparc64 compiler currently fails. Matthias -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: How was compiled cssc on ia64, and other issues
On Fri, Jul 26, 2002 at 11:03:49AM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote: > The shared libgcc1 is built by gcc-3.0 and gcc-3.1. The libgcc1 > package is built from the gcc-3.1 sources. Ah, OK. > > What's silly about that is that gcc-3.1 only seems to be held out of > > testing because an error in copyright file (and maybe because binutils > > is held, which seems to come from an arm-specific patch not being > > applicable any more)... Are these issues to be settled in the near > > future ? > > Maybe it's better to keep out 3.1 out of testing at all. Well, the problem here is that it keeps packages that require 3.0 to enter testing... Would it be possible to rebuild cssc in a "testing" environement, so that this particular issue gets resolved ? > gcc-3.2 will be released soon (3.2 == 3.1.1 + g++ ABI changes). Argh... ABI changes again ? That's a joke, right ? Well... the website says the same, so I guess it's not... Sigh. Regards, -- Yann Dirson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.alcove.com/ Technical support managerResponsable de l'assistance technique Senior Free-Software Consultant Consultant senior en Logiciels Libres Debian developer ([EMAIL PROTECTED])Développeur Debian -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#154369: gcc 3.1.1 upstream
Package: gcc-3.1 Version: 1:3.1.1-0pre3 The official gcc 3.1.1 release tarballs are now available at gcc.gnu.org's ftp site in /pub/gcc/releases/gcc-3.1.1. Can we get a new build with of this package with the official release? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please call me first.....00228.901.58.45
DEAR FRIEND. RE-BUSINESS PROPOSAL I wish this my proposal will not come to you as a surprise. I am Mr. SOJI ANI, a Regional Director with a NATIONAL TRUST SECURITY COMPANY with regional Office in Lome-Togo. We had a foreign client (name with held) who deposited a huge sum of money (US$28.5million) with our Company. Eventually, this client was among the victims of EGYPT AIR BOEING 767 FLIGHT NO.990 that crashed on the 31-10-1999 in U.S.A but, since then we have not had any body coming for the claims as the next of kin. A sitaution I have monitored closely with my position in the Company. Now, having monitored this deposit and managed it over the years before his death, and hence nobody has showed up as the next of kin for the past one year plus, I have removed the file to my private volt. I now solicit for your assistance to present you as the next of kin as every other arrangement has being concluded by me and I am only waiting for a foreigner to enable me move the fund to his account. This does not have any risk attached to it as all the internal documentations will be handled by me. I therefore request you to confirm your interest by a return message and I will furnish you with details. Your interest will be negotiable before we commence the operation.You can call me on my telephone for oral introduction and for more details clarifications. Please send your reply through this e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] or you can call me on my telephone number.00228.901.58.45 I look forward to hearing from you. God bless you and your family. Regards MR. SOJI ANI. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#154369: gcc 3.1.1 upstream
Jack Howarth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Package: gcc-3.1 > Version: 1:3.1.1-0pre3 > > The official gcc 3.1.1 release tarballs are now available > at gcc.gnu.org's ftp site in /pub/gcc/releases/gcc-3.1.1. > Can we get a new build with of this package with the official > release? Jack, I think GCC maintainers are aware of GCC releases. No need to file a bug every time a new GCC is being released. It is harassing. Cheers, -- Jérôme Marant http://marant.org -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#154369: gcc 3.1.1 upstream
> I think GCC maintainers are aware of GCC releases. > No need to file a bug every time a new GCC is being released. > It is harassing. I agree. Also, the new release scripts take some time to run and verify that the tarballs are correct. Until the announcement goes out on the gcc-announce list (and you can watch the web archives of that list), the tarballs may actually be replaced if a problem is discovered. Patience, please. Phil -- If ye love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude greater than the animating contest for freedom, go home and leave us in peace. We seek not your counsel, nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you; and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.- Samuel Adams -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#154369: gcc 3.1.1 upstream
Sorry. I posted it because there appears to be a lag between when the tarballs are posted and the announcement of their availablity. The gcc 3.1.1 announcement still hasn't been made...perhaps to allow the mirrors to populate. In any case, this was more of a wishlist bug report and a heads up on the un-announced availibilty of the tarballs. Jack -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#154369: gcc 3.1.1 upstream
On Fri, Jul 26, 2002 at 12:31:01PM -0400, Jack Howarth wrote: >Sorry. I posted it because there appears to be a lag > between when the tarballs are posted and the announcement > of their availablity. The gcc 3.1.1 announcement still hasn't > been made...perhaps to allow the mirrors to populate. That, plus the tarballs can still be replaced, as I said. > In any > case, this was more of a wishlist bug report and a heads up > on the un-announced availibilty of the tarballs. There's a reason the announcement hasn't been made. Until it has, don't consider them available. Phil -- If ye love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude greater than the animating contest for freedom, go home and leave us in peace. We seek not your counsel, nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you; and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.- Samuel Adams -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#154369: gcc 3.1.1 upstream
Phil, Actually, it looks like it will be trivial to build these packages anyway. Using the release tarball and the current debian directory from the last gcc-3.1-3.1.1ds2 pre3 build, all of the patches apply cleanly. So all anyone needs to is 'apt-get source gcc-3.1', replace the gcc-20020703.tar.bz2 with the release gcc-3.1.1.tar.bz2 and add a changelog entry. Nice. Jack -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
