Re: Status of the 'standard' and 'base' system for the amd64 port
On Tue, Aug 03, 2004 at 05:45:29PM +0200, Andreas Jochens <aj@andaco.de> was heard to say:
> On 04-Aug-03 11:13, Daniel Burrows wrote:
> > I will not apply any patch to aptitude to support unreleased
> > architectures until base is frozen, and possibly until sarge is released.
> > Among other things, every upload I make will force a rebuild on *all*
> > architectures and reset the clock for getting into sarge (which doesn't
> > matter as much once base is frozen, but will cause problems if I have RC
> > bugs later).
>
> Thank you for your reply to my status report for the amd64 port.
>
> I apologize for not having sent a bug report for aptitude to the BTS
> earlier.
> I just corrected this and filed a bug with normal priority and the
> proper one-line patch (see BTS #263267 "aptitude: FTBFS with
> gcc-3.4: an explicit specialization must be preceded by 'template <>'").
I believe this bug was filed already. I actually got aptitude
compiling with gcc-3.4 in the past, but I must have dropped the patch
by accident.
> This bug is in no way specific to the unreleased amd64 port. It is a
> general FTBFS bug which occurs on all architectures when gcc-3.4 is
> used. The C++ code is simply not complying to the C++ standard, but
> earlier gcc versions just did not complain about that.
> When Debian switches to gcc-3.4 after sarge is released,
> this will even become a serious RC bug.
Yes, but there is no released architecture in sarge using gcc-3.4.
> Of course you are right that it is too late (and not necessary) to fix
> this for sarge. However, it would certainly help the amd64 port to
> have a fix for this in 'sid'.
The problem is that changes to sid impact sarge.
Daniel
--
/------------------ Daniel Burrows <d.burrows4@verizon.net> ------------------\
| "Inconceivable!" |
| -- "The Princess Bride" |
\---- Be like the kid in the movie! Play chess! -- http://www.uschess.org ---/
Reply to: