--- Additional Comments From dberlin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-09
04:18 ---
Subject: Re: gcj should generate N_MAIN stab or
DW_AT_entry_point dwarf2 debug info
On Tue, 2005-08-09 at 04:11 +, woodzltc at sources dot redhat dot
com wrote:
> --- Additional Comments F
--- Additional Comments From woodzltc at sources dot redhat dot com
2005-08-09 04:11 ---
OK. I had some time and would like to have a look into this, and I found
something inconsistent. My founding is listed below, wishing that it can help
clarify the situation a little:
1. Someone
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> # Automatically generated email from bts, devscripts version 2.9.4
> tags 321016 d-i
Bug#321016: Wrong priority
Tags were: patch
Tags added: d-i
>
End of message, stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
Debian bug tracking
>Submitter-Id: net
>Originator:Andrew Sayers
>Organization:
>Confidential: no
>Synopsis: G++ returns compilation errors on several (presumably) valid
>nested template classes
>Severity: serious
>Priority: medium
>Category: c++
>Class: rejects-legal
>Release:
Your message dated Mon, 08 Aug 2005 09:17:24 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#321100: fixed in gcc-4.0 4.0.1-4
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 yo
Your message dated Mon, 08 Aug 2005 09:17:24 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#268023: fixed in gcc-4.0 4.0.1-4
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 yo
Your message dated Mon, 08 Aug 2005 09:17:24 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#320915: fixed in gcc-4.0 4.0.1-4
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 yo
Your message dated Mon, 08 Aug 2005 09:17:24 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#321350: fixed in gcc-4.0 4.0.1-4
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 yo
Your message dated Mon, 08 Aug 2005 09:17:24 -0700
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#321540: fixed in gcc-4.0 4.0.1-4
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 yo
Accepted:
cpp-4.0-doc_4.0.1-4_all.deb
to pool/main/g/gcc-4.0/cpp-4.0-doc_4.0.1-4_all.deb
cpp-4.0_4.0.1-4_i386.deb
to pool/main/g/gcc-4.0/cpp-4.0_4.0.1-4_i386.deb
cpp-4.0_4.0.1-4_sparc.deb
to pool/main/g/gcc-4.0/cpp-4.0_4.0.1-4_sparc.deb
fastjar_4.0.1-4_i386.deb
to pool/main/g/gcc-4.0/fastj
gcc-4.0_4.0.1-4_multi.changes uploaded successfully to localhost
along with the files:
lib64objc1_4.0.1-4_sparc.deb
cpp-4.0-doc_4.0.1-4_all.deb
libmudflap0_4.0.1-4_sparc.deb
libgcj6_4.0.1-4_sparc.deb
gcj-4.0_4.0.1-4_i386.deb
gcc-4.0_4.0.1-4_sparc.deb
libobjc1_4.0.1-4_i386.deb
libstd
--- Additional Comments From drow at false dot org 2005-08-08 15:48 ---
Subject: Re: gcj should generate N_MAIN stab or DW_AT_entry_point dwarf2
debug info
On Mon, Aug 08, 2005 at 03:23:22PM -, aph at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> I think we have deadlock here! It's easy enough to
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-08
15:45 ---
(In reply to comment #11)
> I think we have deadlock here! It's easy enough to fix this once the changes
> have been made to gdb but pretty pointless otherwise.
Note: the gdb changes are also needed for fo
Rejected: gcc-4.0_4.0.1-4.dsc: invalid Build-Depends field (can not be parsed
by apt).
===
If you don't understand why your files were rejected, or if the
override file requires editing, reply to this email.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trou
--- Additional Comments From aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-08 15:23
---
I think we have deadlock here! It's easy enough to fix this once the changes
have been made to gdb but pretty pointless otherwise.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1427
--- You are receiv
gcc-4.0_4.0.1-4_multi.changes uploaded successfully to localhost
along with the files:
lib64objc1_4.0.1-4_sparc.deb
cpp-4.0-doc_4.0.1-4_all.deb
libmudflap0_4.0.1-4_sparc.deb
libgcj6_4.0.1-4_sparc.deb
gcj-4.0_4.0.1-4_i386.deb
gcc-4.0_4.0.1-4_sparc.deb
libobjc1_4.0.1-4_i386.deb
libstd
--- Additional Comments From green at redhat dot com 2005-08-08 15:14
---
(In reply to comment #9)
> Anthony, do you think this bug should be fixed?
Yes, I think so.
> What is the status of your gdb
> patch?
It hasn't been applied. I never followed up on the comments from the gdb
ma
--- Additional Comments From aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-08 11:28
---
This bug seems to be moribund.
There exists code in gcc (gen_entry_point_die) to do this, but it is ifdef'd out
at the present time. We could uncomment it and call it; I don't imagine it
would be hard.
Anthon
tags 321016 +patch
thanks
The attached patch should fix this.
Regards
Andreas Jochens
diff -urN ../tmp-orig/gcc-4.0-4.0.1/debian/rules.conf ./debian/rules.conf
--- ../tmp-orig/gcc-4.0-4.0.1/debian/rules.conf 2005-08-08 08:00:14.0
+
+++ ./debian/rules.conf 2005-08-08 07:54:25.000
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> tags 321016 +patch
Bug#321016: Wrong priority
There were no tags set.
Tags added: patch
> thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)
--
20 matches
Mail list logo
