Re: glib 1.1.12, gtk1.1.12 for debian/ppc
On Fri, Jan 15, 1999 at 05:17:52PM +0200, Konstantinos Margaritis wrote:
> On Fri, 15 Jan 1999, luther sven wrote:
>
> > i think in this case the correct thing to do is to fill a bug against this package, did you do it ?
> > you state there that the package don't compile, because of so and so,
> > that they should apply the appended patch. and also for such important
> > package, you are not developper and thus cannot upload the package, you
> > send a copy the problem to the debian-ppc mailing list.
>
> what do you mean fill a bug? against egcs or gtk? In the case of egcs, it
> is not a debian package's fault and the debian site is IMHO the wrong
> place to report this bug, instead it should be at cygnus. But then as I
> said it is a well known bug, so the report would be useless, and I don't
> think that we should duplicate all egcs bugs (the intrinsic ones) to the
> debian egcs package buglist -that would be useless.
> In the case of gtk/glib it is not even a bug of these packages. And I have
> never said that I had a patch for them. There was never one and no need
> for one. I said I compiled the files with no optimizations -should I state
> that I did this manually?- and then proceeded. Indeed, I suppose that
> a patch could be written so that these files get compiled with no
> optimizations, and the package be built with no problem. I really
> question that approach though, and am totally against it. A package
> should not be dealt in some special way because of a compiler
> weakness, even more so when the failing files are not really failing
> to the purposes of their existence. What is the need for a bug report?
And here we reach the really "fun" part. I would really appreciate if
you could attempt to produce a test case. I think there is some
information about doing this in the egcs-docs; what it boils down to is
first isolating where in the source exactly the problem is occuring,
and then removing as much as possible (don't change the compiler flags,
though - -fPIC especially may be involved, with -O2) from the source
without removing the bug. It's not an easy thing to do at all but it
makes fixing the egcs bug MUCH easier.
Dan
/--------------------------------\ /--------------------------------\
| Daniel Jacobowitz |__| CMU, CS class of 2002 |
| Debian GNU/Linux Developer __ Part-Time Systems Programmer |
| dan@debian.org | | drow@cs.cmu.edu |
\--------------------------------/ \--------------------------------/
Reply to: