[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#719885: marked as done (libmudflap0-4.8-dev: Please do not install multilib files from native package)

Your message dated Wed, 13 Nov 2013 00:06:02 +0100
with message-id <5282B45A.3050802@debian.org>
and subject line mudflap now removed from the GCC builds
has caused the Debian Bug report #719885,
regarding libmudflap0-4.8-dev: Please do not install multilib files from native package
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact owner@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)


-- 
719885: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=719885
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message --- 
Package: libmudflap0-4.8-dev
Version: 4.8.1-9
Severity: wishlist

Hi!

The libmudflap0-4.8-dev:amd64 package (for example) ships the 32 and x32
multilib alternatives, something that is done with distinct packages
for all other multilib enabled packages.

As you are intent on supporting multilib, could you please split these
into their lib32foo-dev or libx32foo-dev counterparts as done with the
rest of the packages, so that installing fakecross toolchains becomes
possible w/o major pains?


(I'm aware of #715094 and while slighlty related they are not
requesting the same, although I guess if this bug got fixed that one
would get fixed too? Otherwise please feel free to merge.)

Thanks,
Guillem

--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message --- 
mudflap was removed upstream for GCC 4.9. now removed from the Debian GCC builds
as well.

--- End Message ---
Reply to: