Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> reassign 135651 gcc-2.95
Bug#135651: libstdc++2.10-dev: upgrade fails "version GLIBC_2.2 not found
Bug reassigned from package `libstdc++2.10-dev' to `gcc-2.95'.
> thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
Debian bug
I don't think this is related to libstdc++2.10-dev (a dev package not
containing any shared libs).
> First significant bug is:
>
> Preparing to replace libstdc++2.10-dev 1:2.95.2-13 (using
> .../libstdc++2.10-dev_1%3a2.95.4-1_i386.deb) ...
> perl: /lib/libc.so.6: version `GLIBC_2.2' not found (r
Package: gcc-3.0
Version: 1:3.0.4-1
Perhaps not an issue, but I thought I'd at least let you know.
| Unpacking replacement gcc-3.0 ...
| dpkg - warning, overriding problem because --force enabled:
| trying to overwrite `/lib/64/libgcc_s_64.so', which is also in package
libgcc1-sparc64
--
Jame
Package: gpc
Version: 2:2.95.4-9
When I print floating-point numbers, I sometimes get garbage like this:
-:.00/+)))./(/0,,.0.-.0/,.-(e-15
Compile and run like this:
gpc -O2 -g3 -Wall g2.p && ./a.out
The problem seems to be caused by this:
w := 44;
p := 0;
writeln(, -0.0001e-10:
Package: gpc
Version: 2:2.95.4-9
The "pc" compiler on Tru64 (formerly OSF/1 or Digital UNIX) has
radix control. NOTE: it is typed and works for negative values.
I get stuff like "-FFF" from -4095 but "EE6CD998" from 4000111000.
I've no idea how to get leading zeros on these.
PROGRAM radix ( inpu
On Mon, Feb 25, 2002 at 06:11:52PM +0100, Matthias Klose wrote:
> I don't think this is related to libstdc++2.10-dev (a dev package not
> containing any shared libs).
As I said, the apt maintainer wasn't willing to accept the bug as
their fault. Since libstdc++2.10-dev fails install and seems to
On Mon, 2002-02-25 at 21:07, Blars Blarson wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 25, 2002 at 06:11:52PM +0100, Matthias Klose wrote:
> > I don't think this is related to libstdc++2.10-dev (a dev package not
> > containing any shared libs).
>
> As I said, the apt maintainer wasn't willing to accept the bug as
> the
Works great, thanks Gary!
Ben, FYI - i'll file a bug against glibc for this.
randolph
In reference to a message from Gary Hade, dated Feb 25:
> Randolph,
> I believe this problem is due to a bug in /usr/lib/gcrt1.o
> that was fixed by recent glibc changes to csu/gmon-start.c
> (revs 1.13 and 1
On Mon, Feb 25, 2002 at 09:39:13PM +, Philip Blundell wrote:
> There is no point just trying to pin the blame on arbitrary packages.
> The fact that libstdc++2.10-dev won't configure is a symptom of the
> problem, not the cause.
I don't consider "package that failed install" arbitrary.
> > >
On Mon, 2002-02-25 at 21:51, Blars Blarson wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 25, 2002 at 09:39:13PM +, Philip Blundell wrote:
> > There is no point just trying to pin the blame on arbitrary packages.
> > The fact that libstdc++2.10-dev won't configure is a symptom of the
> > problem, not the cause.
>
> I
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> retitle 135651 libstdc++2.10-dev mainainter blames libdb2 for failed install
Bug#135651: libstdc++2.10-dev: upgrade fails "version GLIBC_2.2 not found
Changed Bug title.
> reassign 135651 libdb2
Bug#135651: libstdc++2.10-dev mainainter blames libdb2 fo
> The "pc" compiler on Tru64 (formerly OSF/1 or Digital UNIX) has
> radix control. NOTE: it is typed and works for negative values.
> I get stuff like "-FFF" from -4095 but "EE6CD998" from 4000111000.
> I've no idea how to get leading zeros on these.
>
>writeln(, 4095:2:16, );
Interest
> When I print floating-point numbers, I sometimes get garbage like this:
> -:.00/+)))./(/0,,.0.-.0/,.-(e-15
Thanks for the report. However, I'm not quite sure of the GPC
version you have (`gpc -v') -- Debian's numbering scheme is a
little peculiar ;-). I guess the following means 200
13 matches
Mail list logo
