On Thu, May 23, 2002 at 06:01:04PM +0200, Jochen Voss wrote:
> after some discussion with Florian Weimer I came
> to the conclusion, that my complaint may not make
> sense. Does it?
The library is definitely /not/ "version 4". The 4 represents an ABI
change; the project's name is still libstdc++
Matthias Klose <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Jérôme Marant writes:
>> Florian Weimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jérôme Marant) writes:
>> >
>> >> I've read in the gcc ML that versioning libgnat as 3.15a
>> >> is erroneous, according to Robert Dewar.
>> >
>> > It's
Jérôme Marant writes:
> Florian Weimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jérôme Marant) writes:
> >
> >> I've read in the gcc ML that versioning libgnat as 3.15a
> >> is erroneous, according to Robert Dewar.
> >
> > It's still in the GCC CVS...
>
> And what's problematic
Florian Weimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jérôme Marant) writes:
>
>> I've read in the gcc ML that versioning libgnat as 3.15a
>> is erroneous, according to Robert Dewar.
>
> It's still in the GCC CVS...
And what's problematic with deciding something on this,
from GC
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jérôme Marant) writes:
> I've read in the gcc ML that versioning libgnat as 3.15a
> is erroneous, according to Robert Dewar.
It's still in the GCC CVS...
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi,
I've read in the gcc ML that versioning libgnat as 3.15a
is erroneous, according to Robert Dewar.
The confusion was made when someone from ACT told that
the libgnat from the GCC tree is _functionaly_ equivalent
to libgnat 3.15a.
I think that this point should be clarified.
Ch
Hello,
after some discussion with Florian Weimer I came
to the conclusion, that my complaint may not make
sense. Does it?
Maybe the package description should nevertheless
be changed to something like "The GNU stdc++
library version 3.1" or "The GNU stdc++ library
for gcc-3.1".
What do you thin
Jochen Voss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> there seems to be a mistake in the short package description
> of libstdc++4. It reads
>
> Description: The GNU stdc++ library version 3
>
> where it should read "... version 4".
Why do you think so? GCC 3.1 was released with libstdc++ 3.1.
--
To
Package: libstdc++4
Version: 1:3.1-2
Severity: minor
Hello,
there seems to be a mistake in the short package description
of libstdc++4. It reads
Description: The GNU stdc++ library version 3
where it should read "... version 4".
Jochen
-- System Information
Debian Release: 3.0
Architectu
Matthias Klose <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> "gnat-3.1" does not fulfill build dependencies on "gnat". On the one
>> hand, it does not provide the "gnatgcc" binary (which is hardwired
>> into some Debian build scripts),
>
> hmm, at least on i386, gnatgcc is in the package. what is missing?
Ah,
Florian Weimer writes:
> Package: gnat-3.1
> Version: N/A; reported 2002-05-23
> Severity: normal
>
> "gnat-3.1" does not fulfill build dependencies on "gnat". On the one
> hand, it does not provide the "gnatgcc" binary (which is hardwired
> into some Debian build scripts),
hmm, at least on i386
Package: gnat-3.1
Version: N/A; reported 2002-05-23
Severity: normal
"gnat-3.1" does not fulfill build dependencies on "gnat". On the one
hand, it does not provide the "gnatgcc" binary (which is hardwired
into some Debian build scripts), on the other, there are known
compiler bugs which prevent p
12 matches
Mail list logo
