On Mon, Dec 19, 2005 at 12:46:09PM +0100, Falk Hueffner wrote: > >> reassign 342545 libgcc2 4.0.2-5 > > Bug#342545: qt-x11-free build fails > > Warning: Unknown package '4.0.2-5' > > Bug reassigned from package `4.0.2-5' to `libgcc2'. > Could you maybe summarize what the actual bug is and why it's > libgcc2's fault? The BTS trail is pretty convoluted. Yes, sorry. Let me quote Aurelien's last mail to 341675, which really should have been sent to 342545: On Sun, Dec 18, 2005 at 06:56:34PM +0100, Aurelien Jarno wrote: > On Mon, Dec 12, 2005 at 02:41:49AM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote: > > This is a bug that was believed fixed previously, but it is *not* bug > > #326581; it's bug #333766, which was fixed in glibc 2.3.5-7. (And it > > really was fixed, otherwise kdelibs4c2 wouldn't be in testing right now > > for hppa.) But it's back in 2.3.5-8; could this have to do with the > > fact that 2.3.5-7 was built (wrongly) with gcc-4.0, and 2.3.5-8 is the > > first version to build with gcc-3.4? > I confirm. Bug #333766 was causing a SIGBUS in uic, when calling > feholdexcept. This has been fixed, and now the problem is a SIGILL that > occurs a few instructions later when calling __umoddi3 from > libgcc_s.so.2. > I have tried other version of libgcc2, from version 4.0.1-7 to version > 4.1-0exp4, and the problem is always there. So it does not seems related > to a recent change in gcc. Maybe this part of code was never called > before for some strange reasons. > It would be nice if somebody fluent with hppa assembly can tell us if > fldw -10(,sp),fr23 > is a valid instruction or not. If not, that's probably a miscompilation > in gcc, as this code is generated from C code. Cheers, -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. vorlon@debian.org http://www.debian.org/
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature