Processing of gcc-4.0_4.0ds9-0pre9_m68k.changes
gcc-4.0_4.0ds9-0pre9_m68k.changes uploaded successfully to localhost along with the files: gcc-4.0-base_4.0-0pre9_m68k.deb libgcc2_4.0-0pre9_m68k.deb cpp-4.0_4.0-0pre9_m68k.deb protoize_4.0-0pre9_m68k.deb fixincludes_4.0-0pre9_m68k.deb libmudflap0_4.0-0pre9_m68k.deb libmudflap0-dev_4.0-0pre9_m68k.deb gobjc-4.0_4.0-0pre9_m68k.deb libobjc1_4.0-0pre9_m68k.deb gij-4.0_4.0-0pre9_m68k.deb libgcj6_4.0-0pre9_m68k.deb libgcj6-awt_4.0-0pre9_m68k.deb gcj-4.0_4.0-0pre9_m68k.deb libgcj6-dev_4.0-0pre9_m68k.deb fastjar_4.0-0pre9_m68k.deb libffi4_4.0-0pre9_m68k.deb libffi4-dev_4.0-0pre9_m68k.deb g++-4.0_4.0-0pre9_m68k.deb libstdc++6_4.0-0pre9_m68k.deb libstdc++6-4.0-dev_4.0-0pre9_m68k.deb libstdc++6-4.0-pic_4.0-0pre9_m68k.deb libstdc++6-4.0-dbg_4.0-0pre9_m68k.deb libgfortran0_4.0-0pre9_m68k.deb gfortran-4.0_4.0-0pre9_m68k.deb treelang-4.0_4.0-0pre9_m68k.deb gcc-4.0_4.0-0pre9_m68k.deb Greetings, Your Debian queue daemon -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#291762: marked as done (gcj-3.4 should depend on libgcj5-dev)
Your message dated Fri, 8 Apr 2005 22:29:02 +0200 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#291762: gcj-3.4 should depend on libgcj5-dev has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact me immediately.) Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 23 Jan 2005 01:25:16 + >From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sat Jan 22 17:25:16 2005 Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Received: from c-24-1-67-127.client.comcast.net (localhost.localdomain) [24.1.67.127] by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian)) id 1CsWVA-0002Ty-00; Sat, 22 Jan 2005 17:25:16 -0800 Received: by localhost.localdomain (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 1285FA51003E; Sat, 22 Jan 2005 19:25:08 -0600 (CST) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Debian Bug Tracking System <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: gcj-3.4 should depend on libgcj5-dev X-Mailer: reportbug 3.5ubuntu2 Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2005 19:25:08 -0600 Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.4 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_PACKAGE, NO_REAL_NAME autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 X-Spam-Level: Package: gcj-3.4 Severity: normal Subject says it all. I installed gcj-3.4 and it gave an error until I installed libgcj5-dev. --- Received: (at 291762-done) by bugs.debian.org; 8 Apr 2005 20:29:16 + >From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Apr 08 13:29:16 2005 Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Received: from mail.cs.tu-berlin.de [130.149.17.13] (root) by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian)) id 1DK06N-db-00; Fri, 08 Apr 2005 13:29:16 -0700 Received: from mailhost.cs.tu-berlin.de ([EMAIL PROTECTED] [130.149.17.13]) by mail.cs.tu-berlin.de (8.9.3p2/8.9.3) with ESMTP id WAA17697; Fri, 8 Apr 2005 22:29:13 +0200 (MEST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailhost.cs.tu-berlin.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7C36AF224; Fri, 8 Apr 2005 22:29:12 +0200 (MEST) Received: from mailhost.cs.tu-berlin.de ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (bueno [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10224) with ESMTP id 11720-30; Fri, 8 Apr 2005 22:29:11 +0200 (MEST) 11267 Received: from bolero.cs.tu-berlin.de (bolero.cs.tu-berlin.de [130.149.19.1]) by mailhost.cs.tu-berlin.de (Postfix) with ESMTP; Fri, 8 Apr 2005 22:29:10 +0200 (MEST) Received: (from [EMAIL PROTECTED]) by bolero.cs.tu-berlin.de (8.12.10+Sun/8.12.8/Submit) id j38KTAEn022192; Fri, 8 Apr 2005 22:29:10 +0200 (MEST) From: Matthias Klose <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2005 22:29:02 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Jerry Haltom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Bug#291762: gcj-3.4 should depend on libgcj5-dev In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> X-Mailer: VM 7.17 under 21.4 (patch 17) "Jumbo Shrimp" XEmacs Lucid X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at cs.tu-berlin.de Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_BUG_NUMBER autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 X-Spam-Level: Jerry Haltom writes: > Hmm. Well, I didn't figure that out on my own. > > The error message it gave was really unhelpful... couldn't find > libgcj.pc. Now that I think about it I understand... but at the time I > didn't. > > Bug can be closed if it doesn't need to be more obvious. =) ok, closing. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
gcc-4.0_4.0ds9-0pre9_m68k.changes ACCEPTED
Accepted: cpp-4.0_4.0-0pre9_m68k.deb to pool/main/g/gcc-4.0/cpp-4.0_4.0-0pre9_m68k.deb fastjar_4.0-0pre9_m68k.deb to pool/main/g/gcc-4.0/fastjar_4.0-0pre9_m68k.deb fixincludes_4.0-0pre9_m68k.deb to pool/main/g/gcc-4.0/fixincludes_4.0-0pre9_m68k.deb g++-4.0_4.0-0pre9_m68k.deb to pool/main/g/gcc-4.0/g++-4.0_4.0-0pre9_m68k.deb gcc-4.0-base_4.0-0pre9_m68k.deb to pool/main/g/gcc-4.0/gcc-4.0-base_4.0-0pre9_m68k.deb gcc-4.0_4.0-0pre9_m68k.deb to pool/main/g/gcc-4.0/gcc-4.0_4.0-0pre9_m68k.deb gcj-4.0_4.0-0pre9_m68k.deb to pool/main/g/gcc-4.0/gcj-4.0_4.0-0pre9_m68k.deb gfortran-4.0_4.0-0pre9_m68k.deb to pool/main/g/gcc-4.0/gfortran-4.0_4.0-0pre9_m68k.deb gij-4.0_4.0-0pre9_m68k.deb to pool/main/g/gcc-4.0/gij-4.0_4.0-0pre9_m68k.deb gobjc-4.0_4.0-0pre9_m68k.deb to pool/main/g/gcc-4.0/gobjc-4.0_4.0-0pre9_m68k.deb libffi4-dev_4.0-0pre9_m68k.deb to pool/main/g/gcc-4.0/libffi4-dev_4.0-0pre9_m68k.deb libffi4_4.0-0pre9_m68k.deb to pool/main/g/gcc-4.0/libffi4_4.0-0pre9_m68k.deb libgcc2_4.0-0pre9_m68k.deb to pool/main/g/gcc-4.0/libgcc2_4.0-0pre9_m68k.deb libgcj6-awt_4.0-0pre9_m68k.deb to pool/main/g/gcc-4.0/libgcj6-awt_4.0-0pre9_m68k.deb libgcj6-dev_4.0-0pre9_m68k.deb to pool/main/g/gcc-4.0/libgcj6-dev_4.0-0pre9_m68k.deb libgcj6_4.0-0pre9_m68k.deb to pool/main/g/gcc-4.0/libgcj6_4.0-0pre9_m68k.deb libgfortran0_4.0-0pre9_m68k.deb to pool/main/g/gcc-4.0/libgfortran0_4.0-0pre9_m68k.deb libmudflap0-dev_4.0-0pre9_m68k.deb to pool/main/g/gcc-4.0/libmudflap0-dev_4.0-0pre9_m68k.deb libmudflap0_4.0-0pre9_m68k.deb to pool/main/g/gcc-4.0/libmudflap0_4.0-0pre9_m68k.deb libobjc1_4.0-0pre9_m68k.deb to pool/main/g/gcc-4.0/libobjc1_4.0-0pre9_m68k.deb libstdc++6-4.0-dbg_4.0-0pre9_m68k.deb to pool/main/g/gcc-4.0/libstdc++6-4.0-dbg_4.0-0pre9_m68k.deb libstdc++6-4.0-dev_4.0-0pre9_m68k.deb to pool/main/g/gcc-4.0/libstdc++6-4.0-dev_4.0-0pre9_m68k.deb libstdc++6-4.0-pic_4.0-0pre9_m68k.deb to pool/main/g/gcc-4.0/libstdc++6-4.0-pic_4.0-0pre9_m68k.deb libstdc++6_4.0-0pre9_m68k.deb to pool/main/g/gcc-4.0/libstdc++6_4.0-0pre9_m68k.deb protoize_4.0-0pre9_m68k.deb to pool/main/g/gcc-4.0/protoize_4.0-0pre9_m68k.deb treelang-4.0_4.0-0pre9_m68k.deb to pool/main/g/gcc-4.0/treelang-4.0_4.0-0pre9_m68k.deb Thank you for your contribution to Debian. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#301208: marked as done (gcc-4.0: FTBFS (ppc64): Please add support for the ppc64 architecture)
Your message dated Fri, 8 Apr 2005 23:23:46 +0200
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line gcc-4.0: FTBFS (ppc64): Please add support for the ppc64
architecture
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am
talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration
somewhere. Please contact me immediately.)
Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)
--
Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 24 Mar 2005 13:38:00 +
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thu Mar 24 05:38:00 2005
Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from c211196.adsl.hansenet.de (localhost.localdomain)
[213.39.211.196]
by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian))
id 1DESX8-0001JK-00; Thu, 24 Mar 2005 05:37:59 -0800
Received: from aj by localhost.localdomain with local (Exim 4.44)
id 1DESX7-0003JA-P5; Thu, 24 Mar 2005 14:37:57 +0100
To: Debian Bug Tracking System <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: Andreas Jochens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: gcc-4.0: FTBFS (ppc64): Please add support for the ppc64 architecture
Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2005 14:37:57 +0100
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02
(1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-8.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_PACKAGE
autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02
X-Spam-Level:
Package: gcc-4.0
Severity: wishlist
Tags: patch
Please add support for the ppc64 architecture to 'gcc-4.0'.
The changes from the attached patch have been used
by the ppc64 archive on alioth since December 2004.
The patch basically uses the same approach as the amd64 port
to create a gcc with multilib support.
Regards
Andreas Jochens
Change summary:
* debian/control.m4
- Add libc6-dev-powerpc [ppc64] to the Build-Depends.
- Change the Description for lib32gcc1: s/ia32/32 bit Version/
- Change the Depends for lib32gcc1 from 'ia32-libs' to '${shlibs:Depends}'.
- Remove "Replaces: ia32-libs.openoffice.org (<< 1ubuntu3)" for lib32gcc1.
* debian/rules.defs
- Define 'biarch_ia32' for ppc64 to use the same 32 bit multilib
facilities as amd64. (Probably 'biarch_ia32' should be renamed
to something like 'biarch32'.)
* debian/rules.d/binary-gcc.mk
- Correct an error in the 'files_gcc' definition for biarch_ia32
(replace '64' by '32').
* debian/rules2
- Do not use '--disable-multilib' on powerpc64-linux.
Use '--disable-nof --disable-softfloat' instead.
* debian/rules.d/binary-libstdcxx.mk
- Put the 32 bit libstdc++ files in '/usr/lib32'.
* debian/rules.patch
- Apply 'ppc64-biarch' patch on ppc64.
* debian/patches/ppc64-biarch.dpatch
- MULTILIB_OSDIRNAMES: Use /lib for native 64 bit libraries and
/lib32 for 32 bit libraries.
- Add multilib handling to src/config-ml.in (taken from amd64-biarch.dpatch).
diff -urN ../tmp-orig/gcc-4.0-4.0ds8/debian/control ./debian/control
--- ../tmp-orig/gcc-4.0-4.0ds8/debian/control 2005-03-24 09:28:32.245097672
+0100
+++ ./debian/control2005-03-24 09:31:26.937816920 +0100
@@ -4,7 +4,7 @@
Maintainer: Debian GCC maintainers
Uploaders: Matthias Klose <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Standards-Version: 3.6.1
-Build-Depends: libc6.1-dev (>= 2.3.2.ds1-19) [alpha ia64] | libc0.3-dev (>=
2.3.2.ds1-19) | libc0.1-dev | libc12-dev (>= 2.3.2.ds1-19) | libc6-dev (>=
2.3.2.ds1-19), libc6-dev-sparc64 [sparc], libc6-dev-s390x [s390],
amd64-libs-dev [i386], ia32-libs-dev [amd64], libunwind7-dev [ia64], m4,
autoconf, automake1.9, libtool, autogen, gawk, dejagnu (>= 1.4.3) [!hurd-i386],
expect (>= 5.38.0) [!hurd-i386], bzip2, binutils (>= 2.15-5) |
binutils-multiarch (>= 2.15-5), binutils-hppa64 [hppa], debhelper (>= 4.1),
gperf (>= 2.7-3), bison (>= 1:1.875a-1), flex, gettext, texinfo (>= 4.3),
zlib1g-dev, libgc-dev [!knetbsd-i386], xlibs-dev, gnat-3.3 [!alpha !arm !ia64
!m68k !kfreebsd-i386 !knetbsd-i386 !netbsd-i386] | gnat-3.4 [!alpha !arm !ia64
!m68k !kfreebsd-i386 !knetbsd-i386 !netbsd-i386], libncurses5-dev
[!netbsd-i386], libmpfr-dev, tetex-bin [!netbsd-i386], locales [!hurd-i386
!knetbsd-i386 !netbsd-i386], procps [alpha arm hppa i386 ia64 m68k mips mipsel
powerpc s390 s390x sh3 sh3eb sh4 sh4e
b sparc sparc64 amd64], help2man [!netbsd-i386], sharutils, libgtk2.0-dev
[!mips !mipsel !knetbsd-i386 !netbsd-i386], libart-2.0-dev [!mips !mipsel
!knetbsd-i386 !netbsd-i386], libcairo1-dev (>= 0.3.0) [!mips !mipsel
!knetbsd-i386 !netbsd-i386], realpath (>= 1.9.12), chrpath, lsb-release
+Build-Depends: libc6.1-dev (>= 2.3.2.ds1-19) [alpha ia64] | libc0.3-dev (>=
2.3.2.ds1-19) | libc0.1-dev | libc12-dev (>= 2.3.2.ds1-1
Bug#302989: optimizer breaks function inlining
Steve M. Robbins writes: > Package: g++-4.0 > Version: 4.0-0pre5 > Severity: normal > > Hi, > > The following test code (atof.cc) elicits no warning when compiled with > > g++-4.0 -c -Wall atof.cc > > but with optimization GCC complains about the standard library > function atof(): > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] -c -Wall -O atof.cc > atof.cc: In member function 'double A::foo()': > atof.cc:15: warning: control may reach end of non-void function 'double > atof(const char*)' being inlined > /usr/include/stdlib.h:378: warning: control may reach end of non-void > function 'double strtod(const char*, char**)' being inlined fixed upstream, please recheck with the gcc-snapshot package -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#302989: optimizer breaks function inlining
On Fri, Apr 08, 2005 at 11:52:15PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote: > Steve M. Robbins writes: > > Package: g++-4.0 > > Version: 4.0-0pre5 > > Severity: normal > > > > Hi, > > > > The following test code (atof.cc) elicits no warning when compiled with > > > > g++-4.0 -c -Wall atof.cc > > > > but with optimization GCC complains about the standard library > > function atof(): > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] -c -Wall -O atof.cc > > atof.cc: In member function 'double A::foo()': > > atof.cc:15: warning: control may reach end of non-void function 'double > atof(const char*)' being inlined > > /usr/include/stdlib.h:378: warning: control may reach end of non-void > function 'double strtod(const char*, char**)' being inlined > > fixed upstream, please recheck with the gcc-snapshot package Yup, gcc-snapshot compiles the example without complaint. Andreas: do you mind checking whether gcc-snapshot will compile Ipe with the addition of a virtual destructor in IpeletHelper, as described in BTS #302606. Thanks, -Steve -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
