On Fri, Nov 30, 2001 at 12:20:20AM +0100, Martin v. Loewis wrote:
> > Nor do I believe that the HOWTO suggests that stdio is bad.
>
> Well, it says "Ditch C". It says so only to get my attention, but I
> still read it as "if you want to performance, do not use stdio"
I think the text makes it c
> Nor do I believe that the HOWTO suggests that stdio is bad.
Well, it says "Ditch C". It says so only to get my attention, but I
still read it as "if you want to performance, do not use stdio" (and
it actually says that).
Regards,
Martin
On Thu, Nov 29, 2001 at 11:20:17PM +0100, Martin v. Loewis wrote:
> > Well, the problem isn't so much with glibc anymore, since 3.0 doesn't use
> > bits and pieces of glibc for I/O like we did in 2.x. (Not even on Linux.)
>
> That exactly is the problem. If stdio and iostreams were still
> integr
> > - require changes to glibc
> > - thus fail to work on older versions of glibc
> > - may break support for older C++ compiler in glibc
> > - break the iostreams ABI of g++ 3.0.
> >
> > To my knowledge, nothing has been done beyond considering solutions so
> > far, but you may ask on the libstdc
> From: Matthew Wilcox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> the example given no longer segfaults on paer.debian.org; i presume an
> upload since has fixed this bug.
I cannot confirm it:
paer% gcc -O3 preproc.c
../src/basemath/arith2.c: In function `compimagraw':
../src/basemath/arith2.c:1219: Internal error:
On Tue, Nov 27, 2001 at 07:18:43PM -0500, Christopher C. Chimelis wrote:
>
> On Tue, 27 Nov 2001, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
>
> > I look at this differently; it's our job to be accepting and GCC's job
> > to be conformant. With Joseph and others actively deprecating
> > extensions, that seems a b
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> retitle 85230 template related ICE compiling ACE 5.1.8 library
Bug#85230: ace: failed to build from source
Changed Bug title.
> reassign 85230 g++
Bug#85230: template related ICE compiling ACE 5.1.8 library
Bug reassigned from package `ace' to `g++'.
> > So, is the final behaviour (aka: non-buffered output) the standard
> > behaviour? My guess is not ... if so, is there a way to fix it?
http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/libstdc++/27_io/howto.html#8
> There is certainly a way to fix it. The problem is that every solution
> that has been consi
Your message dated Thu, 29 Nov 2001 15:34:42 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line doogie is an arse
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 t
Your message dated Thu, 29 Nov 2001 15:28:51 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line notabug
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 t
Your message dated Thu, 29 Nov 2001 15:31:22 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line notabug
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 t
> > In gcc 2.95, tieing stdout and cout was achieved by having the same
> > buffer objects. Since the ABI changed, and since the buffer is in
> > glibc, this isn't possilbe anymore.
>
> So, is the final behaviour (aka: non-buffered output) the standard
> behaviour? My guess is not ... if so,
Package: gcc-3.0
Version: 1:3.0.2-0pre011014
Severity: important
Compiling the attached (preprocessed) source with gcc-3.0 on IA64
gives the following output:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/dum$ gcc3 -c timing.i
util/timing.c: In function `utilGetProcessorTime':
util/timing.c:55: Internal compiler error in
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> reassign 107845 gcc-2.96
Bug#107845: Bug in package gcc-3 on hppa (compiler flag)
Bug reassigned from package `gcc' to `gcc-2.96'.
> retitle 107845 -Wlarger-than-32768 broken in gcc 2.96
Bug#107845: Bug in package gcc-3 on hppa (compiler flag)
Changed
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> reassign 109073 libstdc++2.10
Bug#109073: stringstream adds extra characters at the end
Bug reassigned from package `libstdc++2.10-dev' to `libstdc++2.10'.
> priority 109073 critical
Bug#109073: stringstream adds extra characters at the end
Severity se
Your message dated Thu, 29 Nov 2001 07:32:37 +
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line fixed
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
16 matches
Mail list logo
