Re: c++11 mode in GCC is still marked as experimental (although armel needs work)

Hi On Sat, Jul 12, 2014 at 02:00:35PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote: > I would rather drop any package which does use c++11 features without any > reflection. I now understand the problem. Thanks. On Sat, Jul 12, 2014 at 01:10:52PM +0200, Julien Cristau wrote: > No, just because some random c++1

Bug#680603: gcc-4.7: -fstack-protector(-all) seem to be not working as they were.

Package: gcc-4.7 Version: 4.7.1-3 Severity: normal I was playing with -fstack-protector flag to lern this hardening thing. There may be some regression. Here is my toy example C code with buffer overflow. = #include #include int main(int

Bug#596406: gcc-4.4-base: Broken URL links in README.C++

Package: gcc-4.4-base Version: 4.4.4-14 Severity: minor Tags: patch Many URL links listed in README.C++ are broken. Let's clean this up and make this documentation robust to such URL moves using attached patch. Broken links are removed. I intentionally did not list non-parasoft mirror sites sin

Bug#159804: Suppliment (printf("%#Xll",x) can be funny)

If BUG 159804 is stupid question rather than a BUG for the maintainer , please treat this as wishlist for the missing warning. (I think it is a bug.) Osamu -- +++ + Osamu Aoki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> @ Cupertino, CA USA +

Bug#159804: printf("%#Xll",x) can be funny

Package: gcc Version: 2.95.4-16 Severity: normal This could be glibc error. Following program did not act as I expected. /* * type cast/formatting bug check for GCC / GLIBC * (C) Osamu Aoki, Mon Sep 2 17:51:30 UTC 2002 */ #include int main(int argc, char *argv) { unsigned int b