Bug#151886: status of report #151886? / feedback

Greetings! Matthias Klose <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > [keeping all the people in the CC] > > Scanning the reports, I see Matthew Wilcox beeing asked about: > > > > In either case, I will need a knowledgeable hppa person to advise, > > > discuss and help generate patches for this to get fixed

Bug#174598: gcc-3.2-doc: Bad link in documentation - C++ Extentions

Package: gcc-3.2-doc Version: 1:3.2.1-0pre3 Severity: normal The page entitled "C++ Extensions" of gcc-3.2.info.gz contains the following paragraph: The GNU compiler provides these extensions to the C++ language (and you can also use most of the C language extensions in your C++ programs). I

Bug#79225: further information needed for your Debian report #79225

Matthias Klose wrote: Martin, is there anything we can do without further information? There is clearly a bug in the compiler: the compiler should have rejected the code in the first place. In http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2002-08/msg00401.html a patch for this bug is mentioned, but I don't know if a

gcc-snapshot_20021228-1_i386.changes ACCEPTED

Accepted: gcc-snapshot_20021228-1.diff.gz to pool/main/g/gcc-snapshot/gcc-snapshot_20021228-1.diff.gz gcc-snapshot_20021228-1.dsc to pool/main/g/gcc-snapshot/gcc-snapshot_20021228-1.dsc gcc-snapshot_20021228-1_i386.deb to pool/main/g/gcc-snapshot/gcc-snapshot_20021228-1_i386.deb gcc-snapshot

Bug#112910: marked as done (g++: [arm] fails to compile aptitude >= 0.2.6)

Your message dated Sat, 28 Dec 2002 19:11:03 +0100 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line closing gcc bug report due to missing feedback 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

Bug#79225: further information needed for your Debian report #79225

Please could you recheck your code with recent compiler versions (g++-2.95 and g++-3.2 from Debian unstable)? Martin, is there anything we can do without further information?

Bug#173074: libgcj/9078: libffi: problems with uint8 on powerpc

Thank you very much for your problem report. It has the internal identification `libgcj/9078'. The individual assigned to look at your report is: unassigned. >Category: libgcj >Responsible:unassigned >Synopsis: libffi: problems with uint8 on powerpc >Arrival-Date: Sat Dec 28 03:

Bug#173513: optimization/9079: Inline constant function pointers

Thank you very much for your problem report. It has the internal identification `optimization/9079'. The individual assigned to look at your report is: unassigned. >Category: optimization >Responsible:unassigned >Synopsis: Inline constant function pointers >Arrival-Date: Sat Dec

Bug#163495: afbackup: further information needed

- is afbackup built on an ultrasparc using the 'sparc32' setup? i.e.: sparc32 dpkg-buildpackage ... - do things change using gcc-3.2?

Bug#162074: g++: Warning when including stl.h

reassign 162074 g++-2.95 tags 162074 + fixed retitle 162074 [fix in 3.2] Warning when including stl.h thanks including bits/stl_tree.h or backward/tree.h doesn't show the warning anymore.

Bug#156291: unreproducible report #156291 with gcc-3.2 on ia64

just tried on ia64. getting only syntax errors ... please recheck! $ gcc-3.2 -c bug-156291.i In file included from /usr/include/link.h:25, from ../h/linux.h:12, from ../h/config.h:1, from ../h/include.h:37, from num_log.c:27: /

Bug#168086: help needed with regression from g++-2.95 to g++-3.2 on arm

As this report seems to be an regression from g++-2.95, I would like to forward this one ... Please could someone attach the preprocessed source to the report? See http://bugs.debian.org/168086 Thanks, Matthias PS: And if gcc-snapshot is built for arm, test if it's fixed ...

Bug#151886: status of report #151886? / feedback

[keeping all the people in the CC] Scanning the reports, I see Matthew Wilcox beeing asked about: > > In either case, I will need a knowledgeable hppa person to advise, > > discuss and help generate patches for this to get fixed any time soon. > > Gcl can build its own bfd library, so patches her

Bug#138038: Help offered with report #138038

Hi, back in September, you offered help with this report. please could you run the following commnds: sh -x dpkg-divert --list c++filt dpkg-divert --list /usr/bin/c++filt dpkg-divert --list /usr/bin/c++filt.binutils thanks.

Bug#133574: other/9081: gcc doesn't diagnose, that the compiler exceeds a compiler limit

Thank you very much for your problem report. It has the internal identification `other/9081'. The individual assigned to look at your report is: unassigned. >Category: other >Responsible:unassigned >Synopsis: gcc doesn't diagnose, that the compiler exceeds a compiler >limit >Arri

Bug#171667: marked as done (bits/c++config.h incorrect wrt to existence of long double math.h extensions)

Your message dated Sat, 28 Dec 2002 11:56:33 +0100 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line fixed by building gcc-3.2 without sparc64 support 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

Bug#138038: Help offered with report #138038

Matthias Klose <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > please could you run the following commnds: bash-2.05b# sh -x sh-2.05b# dpkg-divert --list c++filt + dpkg-divert --list c++filt sh-2.05b# dpkg-divert --list /usr/bin/c++filt + dpkg-divert --list /usr/bin/c++filt diversion of /usr/bin/c++filt to /usr/bi

Bug#161615: gcc: -print-file-name sometimes fails

reassign 161615 gcc-3.2 retitle 161615 [fixed in 3.3] -print-file-name sometimes fails thanks $ gcc-3.2 -print-file-name=libc.so /usr/lib/gcc-lib/i386-linux/3.2.2/../../../libc.so $ /usr/lib/gcc-snapshot/bin/gcc -print-file-name=libc.so /usr/lib/libc.so at least I interpret this as beeing fixed

Bug#85468: target/9082: [alpha,ia64] memcpy makes unaligned access

Thank you very much for your problem report. It has the internal identification `target/9082'. The individual assigned to look at your report is: unassigned. >Category: target >Responsible:unassigned >Synopsis: [alpha,ia64] memcpy makes unaligned access >Arrival-Date: Sat Dec 28

Bug#148686: marked as done (gcj-3.1 should provide /etc/alternatives/javac)

Your message dated Sat, 28 Dec 2002 12:50:14 +0100 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line gcj-3.2 provides javac wrapper 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 res

Bug#67723: marked as done ([Alpha] ICE compiling DDD 3.1.2)

Your message dated Sat, 28 Dec 2002 12:58:18 +0100 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line closing old gcc report 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 responsibil

Bug#136659: target/9080: optimisation on sparc leads to unalligned access in memcpy

Thank you very much for your problem report. It has the internal identification `target/9080'. The individual assigned to look at your report is: unassigned. >Category: target >Responsible:unassigned >Synopsis: optimisation on sparc leads to unalligned access in memcpy >Arrival-Da

Bug#158704: gcc: gcc compiles incorrect loop

reassign 158704 gcc-2.95 retitle 158704 [fix in 3.2] gcc doesn't warn about unreachable code tags 158704 + fixed thanks $ gcc-3.2 -Wall -W -Wunreachable-code bug-158704.c bug-158704.c: In function `main': bug-158704.c:12: warning: will never be executed Carlos O'Donell writes: > > >The issue is a

Bug#172031: libgcj/9077: gij is unable to run some programs in the NBIO test suite

Thank you very much for your problem report. It has the internal identification `libgcj/9077'. The individual assigned to look at your report is: unassigned. >Category: libgcj >Responsible:unassigned >Synopsis: gij is unable to run some programs in the NBIO test suite >Arrival-Dat

Bug#84935: additional information needed for aptitude build failure on mips

The report is still missing the preprocessed source (although Ryan wanted to submit it: "I'm preparing the preprocessed source for this one now.", Sun, 16 Sep 2001 11:40:00 -0700 ;-) Please recheck with g++-3.2 from unstable and/or gcc-snapshot (which will hopefully soon available). Closing the r

Bug#84935: additional information needed for aptitude build failure on mips

On Sat, Dec 28, 2002 at 07:46:39PM +0100, Matthias Klose wrote: > The report is still missing the preprocessed source (although Ryan > wanted to submit it: "I'm preparing the preprocessed source for this > one now.", Sun, 16 Sep 2001 11:40:00 -0700 ;-) I believe this was submitted upstream. > Ple

Bug#85230: Debian report #85230 (Ace)

Ossama Othman writes: > Hi Matthias, > > On Mon, May 27, 2002 at 08:52:20PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote: > > tags 85230 + moreinfo > > thanks > > > > what is the status of mips and Ace-5.2? Does Ace compile with g++-3.0 > > and/or g++-3.1 (not only on mips)? > > ACE 5.2 and 5.2.1 may compile wit

Bug#122511: marked as done (gcc: illegal instructions and bad jump offsets when VMA != LMA)

Your message dated Sat, 28 Dec 2002 15:03:40 +0100 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line closing report due to missing feedback 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

Bug#133257: marked as done (gcc: Assembler errors when compiling with -funroll-loops)

Your message dated Sat, 28 Dec 2002 15:01:06 +0100 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line closing report due to missing feedback 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

Bug#143912: marked as done (gcj-3.0: should provide javac alternative )

Your message dated Sat, 28 Dec 2002 12:50:14 +0100 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line gcj-3.2 provides javac wrapper 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 res

Bug#160894: marked as done (g++-3.2: infinite loop in stl_tree.h)

Your message dated Sat, 28 Dec 2002 11:46:34 +0100 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line closing g++-3.2 report, no further information sent 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 ca

Processed: gcc: submitted Debian reports #85468, #169004 to gcc-gnats as PR target/9082

Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > forwarded 85468 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Bug#85468: gcc: [alpha] memcpy makes unaligned access Bug#169004: fping makes unaligned mem accesses, emulated by ia64 kernel Noted your statement that Bug has been forwarded to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > retitle 85468 [PR ta

Processed: gcc: submitted Debian report #117765 to gcc-gnats as PR middle-end/179

Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > forwarded 117765 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Bug#117765: gcc: Failure to detect use of unitialized variable with -O -Wall Noted your statement that Bug has been forwarded to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > retitle 117765 [PR middle-end/179] Failure to detect use of unitiali

Processed: gcc: submitted Debian report #133574 to gcc-gnats as PR other/9081

Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > forwarded 133574 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Bug#133574: gcc: gcc generates incorrect executables if huge static arrays are used Noted your statement that Bug has been forwarded to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > retitle 133574 [PR other/9081] gcc doesn't diagnose, that th

Processed: gcc: submitted Debian report #136659 to gcc-gnats as PR target/9080

Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > forwarded 136659 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Bug#136659: gcc: optimisation on sparc leads to unalligned access in memcpy Noted your statement that Bug has been forwarded to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > retitle 136659 [PR target/9080] optimisation on sparc leads to unalli

Processed: not a bug / fixed with shared libgcc

Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > retitle 118670 [not a bug/fixed in libgcc1] libgcc.a symbols end up exported > by shared libraries Bug#118670: g++: libgcc.a symbols end up exported by shared libraries Changed Bug title. > tags 118670 + fixed Bug#118670: [not a bug/fixed in libgcc1]

Processed: reassign report to sword for further information

Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > reassign 142703 thanks Bug#142703: sword 1.5.3-1 will not build on alpha with assembler error with map templates Bug reassigned from package `g++' to `thanks'. > tags 142703 + moreinfo Bug#142703: sword 1.5.3-1 will not build on alpha with assembler e

Processed: Re: Bug#158704: gcc: gcc compiles incorrect loop

Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > reassign 158704 gcc-2.95 Bug#158704: gcc: gcc compiles incorrect loop Bug reassigned from package `gcc' to `gcc-2.95'. > retitle 158704 [fix in 3.2] gcc doesn't warn about unreachable code Bug#158704: gcc: gcc compiles incorrect loop Changed Bug title.

Processed: Re: Bug#161615: gcc: -print-file-name sometimes fails

Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > reassign 161615 gcc-3.2 Bug#161615: gcc: -print-file-name sometimes fails Bug reassigned from package `gcc' to `gcc-3.2'. > retitle 161615 [fixed in 3.3] -print-file-name sometimes fails Bug#161615: gcc: -print-file-name sometimes fails Changed Bug tit

Processed: Re: Bug#162074: g++: Warning when including stl.h

Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > reassign 162074 g++-2.95 Bug#162074: g++: Warning when including stl.h Bug reassigned from package `g++' to `g++-2.95'. > tags 162074 + fixed Bug#162074: g++: Warning when including stl.h There were no tags set. Tags added: fixed > retitle 162074 [fix

Processed: mark gcc report as forwarded

Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > forwarded 162690 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Bug#162690: [parisc]gcc 3.x produces openssl test code that SEGVs with -march=2.0 and optimization >0 Noted your statement that Bug has been forwarded to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > thanks Stopping processing here. Please

Processed: reassign report to gcc-2.95 (docs fixed in gcc-3.2)

Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > reassign 165992 gcc-2.95 Bug#165992: gcc: __builtin_return_address doesn't work properly Bug reassigned from package `gcc' to `gcc-2.95'. > tags 165992 + fixed Bug#165992: gcc: __builtin_return_address doesn't work properly There were no tags set. Tags

Processed: fixed bug in g++-3.2

Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > reassign 151671 g++-2.95 Bug#151671: [2.95 only] g++ -pedantic-errors -D_GNU_SOURCE cannot #include Bug reassigned from package `g++' to `g++-2.95'. > tags 151671 + fixed Bug#151671: [2.95 only] g++ -pedantic-errors -D_GNU_SOURCE cannot #include Th

Processed: reassign bug from libstdc++ to glibc

Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > reassign 169161 glibc Bug#169161: libstdc++5: Questionable type usage in mangled names Bug reassigned from package `libstdc++5' to `glibc'. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking system admini

Processed: gcc: submitted Debian report #173513 to gcc-gnats as PR optimization/9079

Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > forwarded 173513 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Bug#173513: Wishlist: Inline constant function pointers Noted your statement that Bug has been forwarded to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > retitle 173513 [PR optimization/9079] Inline constant function pointers Bug#173513: Wishl

Processed: gcc: submitted Debian report #173074 to gcc-gnats as PR libgcj/9078

Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > forwarded 173074 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Bug#173074: problems with uint8 on powerpc Noted your statement that Bug has been forwarded to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > retitle 173074 [PR libgcj/9078] libffi: problems with uint8 on powerpc Bug#173074: problems with uint8

Processed: gcc: submitted Debian report #172031 to gcc-gnats as PR libgcj/9077

Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > forwarded 172031 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Bug#172031: gij-3.2: gij is unable to run some programs in the NBIO test suite Noted your statement that Bug has been forwarded to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > retitle 172031 [PR libgcj/9077] gij is unable to run some programs

[alpha,ia64] memcpy makes unaligned access

>Submitter-Id: net >Originator:Herbert Xu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Organization: The Debian Project >Confidential: no >Synopsis: >Severity: serious >Priority: medium >Category: target >Class: wrong-code >Release: 3.2.1 (Debian) (Debian unstable) >Environment:

gcc -fno-dollars-in-identifiers does not warn about dollars in identifiers

>Submitter-Id: net >Originator:Bill Allombert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Organization: The Debian Project >Confidential: no >Synopsis: >Severity: non-critical >Priority: low >Category: c >Class: change-request >Release: 3.2.1 (Debian) (Debian unstable) >Environm

Re: [3.3 branch] bootstrap failures on {arm,mips,mipsel,m68k}-linux

On Dec 28, 2002, Matthias Klose <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > - latest try to build from CVS 20020907 > /tmp/ccs4dU7E.s: Assembler messages: > /tmp/ccs4dU7E.s:28502: Error: Branch out of range > [...] > /tmp/ccs4dU7E.s:33314: Error: Branch out of range This is a bug in the bootstrap compiler. Th

[3.3 branch] bootstrap failures on {arm,mips,mipsel,m68k}-linux

snapshots built form HEAD and then the 3.3 branch fail for the following architectures (on which 3.2.x builds fine). all builds failed from the beginning when the snapshots were built from the HEAD/3.3 branch. arm: http://buildd.debian.org/build.php?arch=arm&pkg=gcc-snapshot - fails with ICE for

gcc doesn't diagnose, that the compiler exceeds a compiler limit

>Submitter-Id: net >Originator:Pavel Machek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Organization: The Debian Project >Confidential: no >Synopsis: >Severity: non-critical >Priority: low >Category: other >Class: accepts-illegal >Release: 3.2.1 (Debian) (Debian unstable) >Envir

optimisation on sparc leads to unalligned access in memcpy

>Submitter-Id: net >Originator:Bernd Eckenfels <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Organization: The Debian Project >Confidential: no >Synopsis: >Severity: serious >Priority: medium >Category: target >Class: wrong-code >Release: 3.2.1 (Debian) (Debian unstable) >Environm

gcc -fno-dollars-in-identifiers does not warn about dollars in identifiers

>Submitter-Id: net >Originator:Bill Allombert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Organization: The Debian Project >Confidential: no >Synopsis: >Severity: non-critical >Priority: low >Category: c >Class: change-request >Release: 3.2.1 (Debian) (Debian unstable) >Environm

Inline constant function pointers

>Submitter-Id: net >Originator:Ian Turner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Organization: The Debian Project >Confidential: no >Synopsis: >Severity: non-critical >Priority: low >Category: optimization >Class: change-request >Release: 3.2.1 (Debian) (Debian unstable) >E

libffi: problems with uint8 on powerpc

>Submitter-Id: net >Originator:David Paul BELANGER <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Organization: The Debian Project >Confidential: no >Synopsis: >Severity: serious >Priority: low >Category: libgcj >Class: sw-bug >Release: 3.2.1 (Debian) (Debian unstable) >Environment

gij is unable to run some programs in the NBIO test suite

>Submitter-Id: net >Originator:Kenneth Pronovici <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Organization: The Debian Project >Confidential: no >Synopsis: >Severity: serious >Priority: low >Category: libgcj >Class: sw-bug >Release: 3.2.2 CVS 20021212 (Debian) (Debian unstable) >