Hi,
I had a look at your dh-fortran-mod package, and am quite sorry I missed
this until now :-/
I assume this is meant for ${misc:Depends} in the -dev package, right?
On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 06:44:50PM +0100, Sébastien Villemot wrote:
> Le dimanche 11 août 2013 à 11:11 +0900, Ryo IGARASHI a écri
reopen 75773
reassign 75773 gcc
quit
On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 01:47:05PM +, Debian Bug Tracking System wrote:
>
> Dear submitter,
>
> as the package gcc-4.6 has just been removed from the Debian archive
> unstable we hereby close the associated bug reports. We are sorry
> that we couldn't de
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> forwarded 796246 https://gcc.gnu.org/PR67308
Bug #796246 [libtsan0] FATAL: ThreadSanitizer: unexpected memory mapping
Set Bug forwarded-to-address to 'https://gcc.gnu.org/PR67308'.
> tags 796246 + upstream
Bug #796246 [libtsan0] FATAL: ThreadSanit
On 08/21/2015 04:04 PM, Alastair McKinstry wrote:
> Hi Matthias
>
> This is a good development, sorry I missed the BoF.
> I will add this to my other gfortran packages, e.g. adios, that also
> produce .mod files.
maybe give Sebastien a chance to upload a version of dh_fortran first? Otoh it's
not
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> reopen 75773
Bug #75773 {Done: Debian FTP Masters }
[gcc-4.6] [PR optimization/3507]: appalling optimisation with sub/cmp on i386
Bug #107123 {Done: Debian FTP Masters }
[gcc-4.6] [PR optimization/3507, optimization/3996] Non-optimal code
'reope
Your message dated Fri, 21 Aug 2015 13:43:08 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#796274: Removed package(s) from unstable
has caused the Debian Bug report #631427,
regarding gcc-4.6: FTBFS with GCC_TARGET
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
Version: 4.6.4-7+rm
Dear submitter,
as the package gcc-4.6 has just been removed from the Debian archive
unstable we hereby close the associated bug reports. We are sorry
that we couldn't deal with your issue properly.
For details on the removal, please see https://bugs.debian.org/796274
The v
We believe that the bug you reported is now fixed; the following
package(s) have been removed from unstable:
cpp-4.6 |4.6.4-7 | amd64, armel, armhf, hurd-i386, i386, kfreebsd-amd64,
kfreebsd-i386, mips, mipsel, powerpc, s390x
g++-4.6 |4.6.4-7 | amd64, armel, armhf, hurd-i386, i386,
Your message dated Fri, 21 Aug 2015 13:43:08 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#796274: Removed package(s) from unstable
has caused the Debian Bug report #650803,
regarding gcc-4.6: ICE for gcc on arm with hardfp ABI
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has bee
Your message dated Fri, 21 Aug 2015 13:43:08 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#796274: Removed package(s) from unstable
has caused the Debian Bug report #676558,
regarding gcc-4.6: Incorrect assembly code generated for loop over char ** in
named sections
to be marked as done.
This means
Your message dated Fri, 21 Aug 2015 13:43:08 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#796274: Removed package(s) from unstable
has caused the Debian Bug report #672996,
regarding libstdc++6-4.6-dev: Static linking of C++ runtime fails due to
relocation problems, recompiling with -fPIC needed.
t
Your message dated Fri, 21 Aug 2015 13:43:08 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#796274: Removed package(s) from unstable
has caused the Debian Bug report #764220,
regarding gcc incorrectly optimizes away parameter initialization
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the pro
Your message dated Fri, 21 Aug 2015 13:43:08 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#796274: Removed package(s) from unstable
has caused the Debian Bug report #659865,
regarding Regression: address of bitfield
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with
Your message dated Fri, 21 Aug 2015 13:43:08 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#796274: Removed package(s) from unstable
has caused the Debian Bug report #704999,
regarding Please consider providing a more helpful error message when cc1plus
is killed.
to be marked as done.
This means tha
Your message dated Fri, 21 Aug 2015 13:43:08 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#796274: Removed package(s) from unstable
has caused the Debian Bug report #793873,
regarding gcc-4.6: should not be released with stretch
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has be
Your message dated Fri, 21 Aug 2015 13:43:08 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#796274: Removed package(s) from unstable
has caused the Debian Bug report #668949,
regarding false positive with -Werror=array-bounds
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been d
Your message dated Fri, 21 Aug 2015 13:43:08 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#796274: Removed package(s) from unstable
has caused the Debian Bug report #653493,
regarding g++-4.6: [powerpc] Behavior changed for restfpr symbol
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the prob
Your message dated Fri, 21 Aug 2015 13:43:08 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#796274: Removed package(s) from unstable
has caused the Debian Bug report #75773,
regarding [PR optimization/3507]: appalling optimisation with sub/cmp on i386
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim t
Your message dated Fri, 21 Aug 2015 13:43:08 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#796274: Removed package(s) from unstable
has caused the Debian Bug report #696506,
regarding error on using a pch: had text segment at different address
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the
Your message dated Fri, 21 Aug 2015 13:43:08 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#796274: Removed package(s) from unstable
has caused the Debian Bug report #633477,
regarding [gcc-4.6] -flto generate executable stack
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been
Your message dated Fri, 21 Aug 2015 13:43:08 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#796274: Removed package(s) from unstable
has caused the Debian Bug report #629866,
regarding gcc-4.6: --no-add-needed disturbs weak references
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem h
Your message dated Fri, 21 Aug 2015 13:43:08 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#796274: Removed package(s) from unstable
has caused the Debian Bug report #645018,
regarding gcc-4.6: build error on REVERSE_CROSS ("gengtype" is wrong arch)
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim tha
Your message dated Fri, 21 Aug 2015 13:43:08 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#796274: Removed package(s) from unstable
has caused the Debian Bug report #635214,
regarding gcc-4.6: [sparc] miscompile PARI/GP 2.5.0 [test-case provided]
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that
Your message dated Fri, 21 Aug 2015 13:43:08 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#796274: Removed package(s) from unstable
has caused the Debian Bug report #639818,
regarding gcc-4.6: valgrind reports "Invalid read of size 4" in legal code
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim tha
Your message dated Fri, 21 Aug 2015 13:43:08 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#796274: Removed package(s) from unstable
has caused the Debian Bug report #630441,
regarding g++-4.6 miscompilation
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this
Your message dated Fri, 21 Aug 2015 13:43:08 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#796274: Removed package(s) from unstable
has caused the Debian Bug report #629009,
regarding gcc-4.6: "Illegal instruction (program cc1)" error on i586
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the
Your message dated Fri, 21 Aug 2015 13:43:08 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#796274: Removed package(s) from unstable
has caused the Debian Bug report #641374,
regarding g++-4.6: internal compiler error with a simple program in C++0x mode
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim
Your message dated Fri, 21 Aug 2015 13:43:08 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#796274: Removed package(s) from unstable
has caused the Debian Bug report #643852,
regarding mafft: FTBFS on ia64: partQalignmm.c:210:1: internal compiler error:
in code_motion_path_driver, at sel-sched.c:6575
Your message dated Fri, 21 Aug 2015 13:43:08 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#796274: Removed package(s) from unstable
has caused the Debian Bug report #698685,
regarding gcc 4.6.3 - c-pragma.h and c-common.h in wrong location
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the pro
Your message dated Fri, 21 Aug 2015 13:43:08 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#796274: Removed package(s) from unstable
has caused the Debian Bug report #75773,
regarding [PR optimization/3507, optimization/3996] Non-optimal code
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the p
Your message dated Fri, 21 Aug 2015 13:43:08 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#796274: Removed package(s) from unstable
has caused the Debian Bug report #670084,
regarding gcc-*: please allow cross-building for arbitrary GNU triplets
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that t
Your message dated Fri, 21 Aug 2015 13:43:08 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#796274: Removed package(s) from unstable
has caused the Debian Bug report #666743,
regarding gcc-4.6: please provide a multiarch:foreign compiler interface
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that
Your message dated Fri, 21 Aug 2015 13:43:08 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#796274: Removed package(s) from unstable
has caused the Debian Bug report #658251,
regarding gfortran-4.6: Minimum integer cannot be parsed by read statement
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim tha
Your message dated Fri, 21 Aug 2015 13:43:08 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#796274: Removed package(s) from unstable
has caused the Debian Bug report #646733,
regarding gcc-4.6: missing instructions how to create the .orig.tar.gz for a
new upstream release
to be marked as done.
This
Your message dated Fri, 21 Aug 2015 13:43:08 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#796274: Removed package(s) from unstable
has caused the Debian Bug report #647425,
regarding g++-4.6: warn_unused_result error triggerd even if casted
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the p
Your message dated Fri, 21 Aug 2015 13:43:08 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#796274: Removed package(s) from unstable
has caused the Debian Bug report #646160,
regarding gcc-4.6: ICE when building neon code with -g -O -mfpu=neon
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the
Your message dated Fri, 21 Aug 2015 13:43:08 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#796274: Removed package(s) from unstable
has caused the Debian Bug report #646163,
regarding gcc-4.6: another ICE when building neon code
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has be
Your message dated Fri, 21 Aug 2015 13:43:08 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#796274: Removed package(s) from unstable
has caused the Debian Bug report #644727,
regarding gcc fails on i586 processor
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If
Your message dated Fri, 21 Aug 2015 13:43:08 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#796274: Removed package(s) from unstable
has caused the Debian Bug report #641859,
regarding ICE: gfortran-4.6: ICE on armhf with fbasics
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has be
Your message dated Fri, 21 Aug 2015 13:43:08 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#796274: Removed package(s) from unstable
has caused the Debian Bug report #637885,
regarding g++ -m32 does not work out of the box
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been deal
Your message dated Fri, 21 Aug 2015 13:43:08 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#796274: Removed package(s) from unstable
has caused the Debian Bug report #633458,
regarding gcc-4.6 miscompiles libgcrypt11 on armel
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been d
Your message dated Fri, 21 Aug 2015 13:43:08 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#796274: Removed package(s) from unstable
has caused the Debian Bug report #635153,
regarding g++-4.6: ICE on ia64 when building iceweasel 5.0-4
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem
Your message dated Fri, 21 Aug 2015 13:43:08 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#796274: Removed package(s) from unstable
has caused the Debian Bug report #628063,
regarding g++-4.6: inline causes virtual methods not to be considered on armel
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim
Your message dated Fri, 21 Aug 2015 13:43:08 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#796274: Removed package(s) from unstable
has caused the Debian Bug report #629137,
regarding gcc-4.6: on amd64, sizeof(__int128_t) > sizeof(intmax_t)
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the pr
Your message dated Fri, 21 Aug 2015 13:43:08 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#796274: Removed package(s) from unstable
has caused the Debian Bug report #624854,
regarding gcc-4.6: inlining issues when __attribute__((flatten)) is used
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that
Your message dated Fri, 21 Aug 2015 13:43:08 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#796274: Removed package(s) from unstable
has caused the Debian Bug report #626869,
regarding gcc-4.6: undefined reference to `_q_add' with -mabi=ieeelongdouble
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim t
On 05/07/2014 04:00 PM, Sébastien Villemot wrote:
> Le samedi 03 mai 2014 à 21:07 +0200, Matthias Klose a écrit :
>
>> So we should have
>>
>> /usr/include//fortran/
>
> I have pushed a change to dh_fortran_mod that implements that location.
>
> So the setup is the same as for C++, except that
47 matches
Mail list logo
