Bug#1005863: binutils: invalid opcode for Geode LX on i386

2023-03-20 Thread James Addison
Followup-For: Bug #1005863 X-Debbugs-Cc: ballo...@debian.org Control: reassign -1 binutils 2.38-1 Reassigning this from package 'gcc' to 'binutils': It looks like it is GNU binutils[1] (and in particular, the GNU assembler) that is responsible for producing the assembly opcodes for a binary compi

gcc-13_13-20230320-1_source.changes ACCEPTED into experimental

2023-03-20 Thread Debian FTP Masters
Thank you for your contribution to Debian. Accepted: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Format: 1.8 Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2023 12:31:54 +0100 Source: gcc-13 Architecture: source Version: 13-20230320-1 Distribution: experimental Urgency: medium Maintainer: Debian GCC Maintainers

Processing of gcc-13_13-20230320-1_source.changes

2023-03-20 Thread Debian FTP Masters
gcc-13_13-20230320-1_source.changes uploaded successfully to localhost along with the files: gcc-13_13-20230320-1.dsc gcc-13_13-20230320.orig.tar.gz gcc-13_13-20230320-1.debian.tar.xz gcc-13_13-20230320-1_source.buildinfo Greetings, Your Debian queue daemon (running on host

Bug#1005863: gcc-11: invalid opcode for Geode LX on i386

2023-03-20 Thread Bill Allombert
On Sun, Mar 19, 2023 at 11:47:21PM +, James Addison wrote: > Package: gcc-11 > Followup-For: Bug #1005863 > X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-gcc@lists.debian.org, debian-rele...@lists.debian.org, > debian-pol...@lists.debian.org > > Hi folks, > > Bug #1005863 describes a gcc-11 behaviour that results in

Bug#1005863: gcc-11: invalid opcode for Geode LX on i386

2023-03-20 Thread James Addison
On Mon, 20 Mar 2023 at 07:22, Bastian Blank wrote: > > On Sun, Mar 19, 2023 at 11:47:21PM +, James Addison wrote: > > Would it be fair to raise the severity of this bug to a release-critical > > level? > > No, it would be fair to remove Geode LX from the set of supported > processors. Those a

Bug#1005863: gcc-11: invalid opcode for Geode LX on i386

2023-03-20 Thread Bastian Blank
On Sun, Mar 19, 2023 at 11:47:21PM +, James Addison wrote: > Would it be fair to raise the severity of this bug to a release-critical > level? No, it would be fair to remove Geode LX from the set of supported processors. Those are now over 15 years old. Bastian -- No one wants war.