Bug#96099: marked as done (gcc bug(s))

Your message dated Wed, 2 May 2001 19:18:23 -0400 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#96099: gcc bug(s) 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 responsibilit

Bug#96099: gcc bug(s)

On Wed, May 02, 2001 at 12:47:56PM -0600, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > first > dpkg --list | grep gcc > yeilds > ii gcc2.95.3-7 The GNU C compiler. > ii gcc-2.95 2.95.4-0.01042 The GNU C compiler. > > I'm not 100% sure why my system thinks both "gcc"

new gcc-2.95 packages

please could someone of you (Ben, Dan ?) build the gcc-2.95, which I checked in to the CVS? I still have to find out why the architecture string isn't correctly generated ... that's on an uptodate unstable system. dh_installdeb -a dh_gencontrol -a -u-v1:2.95.4-0.010502 dh_md5sums -a dh_builddeb

Bug#96099: gcc bug(s)

package: gcc version: 2.95.4-0.01042 running on intel based system (old pentium 133Mhz) first dpkg --list | grep gcc yeilds ii gcc2.95.3-7 The GNU C compiler. ii gcc-2.95 2.95.4-0.01042 The GNU C compiler. I'm not 100% sure why my system thinks

gcc 2.95.4 workaround

Jack Howarth writes: > Hello, >In case Franz Sirl hasn't passed this along the problem with > current gcc 2.95.4 building glibc 2.2.3 can be worked around > with a hack similar to gcc/varasm.c he updated the patch. expect a new uplaod tonight.

Processed: new email address (newer than the bugs, anyway)

Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > close 30774 Bug#30774: ppp: pppd kills entire process group on exit Bug closed, send any further explanations to Kalle Olavi Niemitalo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > reopen 30774 ! Bug#30774: ppp: pppd kills entire process group on exit Bug reopened, originat

gcc 2.95.4 workaround

Hello, In case Franz Sirl hasn't passed this along the problem with current gcc 2.95.4 building glibc 2.2.3 can be worked around with a hack similar to gcc/varasm.c @@ -4344,8 +4350,15 @@ declare_weak (decl) { if (! TREE_PUBLIC (decl)) error_with_decl (decl, "weak declaration of `%s' m

clarification of fix (fwd)

Hi, this is the second mail Jack sent me. cu Adrian -- Forwarded message -- Date: Tue, 1 May 2001 22:50:22 -0400 (EDT) From: Jack Howarth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: clarification of fix Adrian, After looking at what patches from Franz Sirl you current

gcc 2.95.4 fix (fwd)

Hi, I got this and the next mail I'll forward from Jack (I'm not sure if he did also send them to you). cu Adrian -- Forwarded message -- Date: Tue, 1 May 2001 22:00:44 -0400 (EDT) From: Jack Howarth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: gcc 2.95.4 fix Hello, I