Can we work together?

Hi,    I hope all is well with you.    I'm contacting you on behalf of a large digital marketing agency and I would like to discuss guest posting opportunities with you. We have a sizable pool of clients to our name and so as a result, we have the ability to post multiple times on a give

Re: Toolchain issues on MIPS

On 18.01.2016 22:32, Aurelien Jarno wrote: Hi Anibal, I am contacting you about debian bugs #804002 and #804536 which badly affects GCC on MIPS. They are not strictly speaking bug in the MIPS target of GCC, but it would be nice if the toolchain team at Imagination Technologies could have a look.

gcc-4.9_4.9.3-11_amd64.changes ACCEPTED into unstable

++-4.9-dev - GNU Standard C++ Library v3 (development files) libx32stdc++6-4.9-dbg - GNU Standard C++ Library v3 (debugging files) Changes: gcc-4.9 (4.9.3-11) unstable; urgency=medium . * Update to SVN 20160118 (r232532) from the gcc-4_9-branch. * Fix cross-building without having the common

Processing of gcc-4.9_4.9.3-11_amd64.changes

gcc-4.9_4.9.3-11_amd64.changes uploaded successfully to localhost along with the files: gcc-4.9_4.9.3-11.dsc gcc-4.9_4.9.3-11.diff.gz cpp-4.9-dbgsym_4.9.3-11_amd64.deb cpp-4.9_4.9.3-11_amd64.deb g++-4.9-dbgsym_4.9.3-11_amd64.deb g++-4.9-multilib_4.9.3-11_amd64.deb g++-4.9_4.9.3-11_amd

Toolchain issues on MIPS

Hi Anibal, I am contacting you about debian bugs #804002 and #804536 which badly affects GCC on MIPS. They are not strictly speaking bug in the MIPS target of GCC, but it would be nice if the toolchain team at Imagination Technologies could have a look. These bugs have already been reported upstre

Bug#810514: marked as done (libgcj17{,-awt}: missing Breaks+Replaces on libgcj16{,-awt})

Your message dated Mon, 18 Jan 2016 21:50:18 +0100 with message-id <569d500a.8080...@debian.org> and subject line Re: Bug#810514: closed by Matthias Klose (Re: Bug#810514: libgcj17{,-awt}: missing Breaks+Replaces on libgcj16{,-awt}) has caused the Debian Bug report #810514, regarding libgcj17{,-a

gcc-4.8_4.8.5-4_amd64.changes ACCEPTED into unstable

Accepted: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Format: 1.8 Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2016 16:20:41 +0100 Source: gcc-4.8 Binary: gcc-4.8-base libgcc-4.8-dev lib64gcc-4.8-dev lib32gcc-4.8-dev libn32gcc-4.8-dev libx32gcc-4.8-dev gcc-4.8 gcc-4.8-multilib gcc-4.8-plugin-dev gcc-4.8-hppa64 cpp-

Bug#805698: marked as done (gcc-4.8: FTBFS on hppa: Control dependency for binutils-hppa64 needs update for new package name)

Your message dated Mon, 18 Jan 2016 18:21:30 + with message-id and subject line Bug#805698: fixed in gcc-4.8 4.8.5-4 has caused the Debian Bug report #805698, regarding gcc-4.8: FTBFS on hppa: Control dependency for binutils-hppa64 needs update for new package name to be marked as done. This

Bug#797657: marked as done (gcc-4.8: please allow building derivatives with same parent rules)

Your message dated Mon, 18 Jan 2016 18:21:30 + with message-id and subject line Bug#797657: fixed in gcc-4.8 4.8.5-4 has caused the Debian Bug report #797657, regarding gcc-4.8: please allow building derivatives with same parent rules to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the p

Processing of gcc-4.8_4.8.5-4_amd64.changes

gcc-4.8_4.8.5-4_amd64.changes uploaded successfully to localhost along with the files: gcc-4.8_4.8.5-4.dsc gcc-4.8_4.8.5-4.diff.gz cpp-4.8-dbgsym_4.8.5-4_amd64.deb cpp-4.8_4.8.5-4_amd64.deb g++-4.8-dbgsym_4.8.5-4_amd64.deb g++-4.8-multilib_4.8.5-4_amd64.deb g++-4.8_4.8.5-4_amd64.deb

Bug#811369: Removed package(s) from experimental

We believe that the bug you reported is now fixed; the following package(s) have been removed from experimental: libgcj16 | 6-20151220-1 | powerpc libgcj16 | 6-20160101-1 | amd64, arm64, armel, armhf, i386, ppc64el, s390x libgcj16-awt | 6-20151220-1 | powerpc libgcj16-awt | 6-20160101-1 | amd6

Bug#809509: Processed: retitle 809509 to gcc-6: Please build with -mcpu=ultrasparc on sparc64 when building 32-bit binaries

On 01/05/2016 11:21 AM, Jose E. Marchesi wrote: > Right. cpu_32, cpu_64, tune_32 and tune_64 are not supported in sparc* > targets yet. > > I will prepare a patch for that and send it upstream. Any news on this issue? Didn't happen yet.

Bug#811063: gcc-6: FTBFS on kfreebsd-amd64 and kfreebsd-i386

On 18.01.2016 13:34, Svante Signell wrote: This file is for GNU/Hurd, the kFreeBSD file to patch is src/gcc/ada/s-osinte- kfreebsd-gnu.ads. my bad. now applied.

Bug#811063: gcc-6: FTBFS on kfreebsd-amd64 and kfreebsd-i386

Hi Matthias, et al. On Mon, 2016-01-18 at 12:56 +0100, Matthias Klose wrote: > clone 811063 -1 > reopen -1 > retitle -1 gcc-6: FTBFS on kfreebsd-amd64 and kfreebsd-i386 > thanks > > Steven, please could you have a look at upstreaming the kfreebsd patches? > > On 17.01.2016 21:42, Steven Chamberl

Bug#811063: gcc-6: FTBFS on kfreebsd-amd64 and kfreebsd-i386

clone 811063 -1 reopen -1 retitle -1 gcc-6: FTBFS on kfreebsd-amd64 and kfreebsd-i386 thanks Steven, please could you have a look at upstreaming the kfreebsd patches? On 17.01.2016 21:42, Steven Chamberlain wrote: Hi, Svante Signell wrote: I think the same patch applies to the kfreebsd-* buil

Processed: Re: Bug#811063: gcc-6: FTBFS on kfreebsd-amd64 and kfreebsd-i386

Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org: > clone 811063 -1 Bug #811063 {Done: Matthias Klose } [src:gcc-6] gcc-6: FTBFS on hurd-i386 Bug 811063 cloned as bug 811372 > reopen -1 Bug #811372 {Done: Matthias Klose } [src:gcc-6] gcc-6: FTBFS on hurd-i386 'reopen' may be inappropriate when a

Bug#809509: Processed: retitle 809509 to gcc-6: Please build with -mcpu=ultrasparc on sparc64 when building 32-bit binaries

Hi Jose! On 01/05/2016 11:21 AM, Jose E. Marchesi wrote: > Right. cpu_32, cpu_64, tune_32 and tune_64 are not supported in sparc* > targets yet. > > I will prepare a patch for that and send it upstream. Any news on this issue? Adrian -- .''`. John Paul Adrian Glaubitz : :' : Debian Develo