On Wed, Mar 02, 2005 at 10:42:54AM +0100, Matthias Klose wrote:
> Richard Zidlicky writes:
> > Hi,
> >
> > the problem has been already discussed some time
> > ago "upstream", now ocatve triggered the bug so
> > it seems the fix should be backporte
Hi,
the problem has been already discussed some time
ago "upstream", now ocatve triggered the bug so
it seems the fix should be backported to 3.3
octave problem
http://lists.debian.org/debian-68k/2005/02/msg00049.html
gcc discussion
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2004-03/msg00940.html
http://gc
On Fri, Jan 24, 2003 at 02:28:31PM -0800, Jeff Bailey wrote:
> I don't know if it's significant, but upstream announced .18 today with
> the following changelog:
>
> Changes from binutils 2.13.90.0.16:
>
>
...
> 5.
On Fri, Jan 24, 2003 at 11:34:34AM +0900, GOTO Masanori wrote:
> > which binutils are used? Some older versions had bugs that were
> > only triggered by gcc-3.2
>
> At least I tested with binutils 2.13.90.0.16-1.
> But, I don't know the version number of the buildd environment.
seems to be the
On Wed, Jan 22, 2003 at 06:43:55AM +0900, GOTO Masanori wrote:
> > On Sun, Jan 19, 2003 at 07:48:04PM -0800, Jeff Bailey wrote:
> > > I haven't seen mention of it on this list, so I wanted to bring it up -
> > > Bug #175526 against glibc is m68k specific.
> >
> > interesting. I am running glibc-
On Tue, Oct 29, 2002 at 06:10:57PM +0100, Yann Dirson wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 21, 2002 at 09:43:05PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
> > Yann Dirson writes:
> > > I have several packages (e2fsprogs, bigloo) that fail to build on
> > > m68k, apparently due to one or more gcc bug(s). Maybe that's the same
6 matches
Mail list logo
