Processed: gcc-6 now

2016-08-03 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Processing control commands: > retitle -1 Should update to gcc-6-doc packages Bug #794778 [gcc-doc] Should update to gcc-5-doc packages Changed Bug title to 'Should update to gcc-6-doc packages' from 'Should update to gcc-5-doc packages'. -- 794778: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?

Bug#794778: gcc-6 now

2016-08-03 Thread Adam Borowski
Control: retitle -1 Should update to gcc-6-doc packages Now that the compiler itself defaults to gcc-6, the docs should follow suit. -- An imaginary friend squared is a real enemy.

gcc-defaults_1.163_amd64.changes ACCEPTED into unstable

2016-08-03 Thread Debian FTP Masters
Accepted: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Format: 1.8 Date: Wed, 03 Aug 2016 13:56:07 +0200 Source: gcc-defaults Binary: cpp gcc gcc-multilib g++ g++-multilib gobjc gobjc-multilib gobjc++ gobjc++-multilib gfortran gfortran-multilib gccgo gccgo-multilib libgcj-common libgcj-bc

Processing of gcc-defaults_1.163_amd64.changes

2016-08-03 Thread Debian FTP Masters
gcc-defaults_1.163_amd64.changes uploaded successfully to localhost along with the files: gcc-defaults_1.163.dsc gcc-defaults_1.163.tar.gz cpp-aarch64-linux-gnu_6.1.1-1_amd64.deb cpp-arm-linux-gnueabi_6.1.1-1_amd64.deb cpp-arm-linux-gnueabihf_6.1.1-1_amd64.deb cpp-mips-linux-gnu_6.1.1-1

Re: GCC 6 defaults change, including icu 57 and boost 1.61 transitions

2016-08-03 Thread Emilio Pozuelo Monfort
On 03/08/16 19:37, Matthias Klose wrote: > I'd like to make the GCC 6 defaults change later this week(end), including icu > 57 and boost 1.61 transitions. > > While the bug number of the GCC 6 related issues is still high, I'm proposing > to > fix these on the fly (as suggested/discussed with Nil

GCC 6 defaults change, including icu 57 and boost 1.61 transitions

2016-08-03 Thread Matthias Klose
I'd like to make the GCC 6 defaults change later this week(end), including icu 57 and boost 1.61 transitions. While the bug number of the GCC 6 related issues is still high, I'm proposing to fix these on the fly (as suggested/discussed with Nils), because many of the symbols related build failures

gcc-4.9_4.9.4-1_all.changes ACCEPTED into unstable

2016-08-03 Thread Debian FTP Masters
Accepted: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Format: 1.8 Date: Wed, 03 Aug 2016 11:37:44 +0200 Source: gcc-4.9 Binary: gcc-4.9-base libgcc-4.9-dev libgcc4 libgcc4-dbg lib64gcc-4.9-dev lib32gcc-4.9-dev libn32gcc-4.9-dev libx32gcc-4.9-dev gcc-4.9 gcc-4.9-multilib gcc-4.9-plugin-dev

Processing of gcc-4.9_4.9.4-1_all.changes

2016-08-03 Thread Debian FTP Masters
gcc-4.9_4.9.4-1_all.changes uploaded successfully to localhost along with the files: gcc-4.9_4.9.4-1.dsc gcc-4.9_4.9.4.orig.tar.gz gcc-4.9_4.9.4-1.diff.gz gcc-4.9-locales_4.9.4-1_all.deb gcc-4.9-source_4.9.4-1_all.deb gcj-4.9-jre-lib_4.9.4-1_all.deb gcj-4.9-source_4.9.4-1_all.deb li

[Bug c/23144] [5/6/7 Regression] invalid parameter forward declarations not diagnosed

2016-08-03 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23144 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|4.9.4 |5.5 --- Comment #21 from Richard Biener

[Bug c/23144] [5/6/7 Regression] invalid parameter forward declarations not diagnosed

2016-08-03 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23144 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|[4.9/5/6/7 Regression] |[5/6/7 Regression] invalid