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

Bug#594289: marked as done (linux-2.6: non-standard gcc/g++ used for build (gcc-4.3))



Your message dated Wed, 25 Aug 2010 11:11:51 +0200
with message-id <20100825091150.GC6206@radis.liafa.jussieu.fr>
and subject line Re: Bug#594289: linux-2.6: non-standard gcc/g++ used for build (gcc-4.3)
has caused the Debian Bug report #594289,
regarding linux-2.6: non-standard gcc/g++ used for build (gcc-4.3)
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.)


-- 
594289: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=594289
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: linux-2.6
Version: 2.6.32-20
Severity: normal
User: debian-gcc@lists.debian.org
Usertags: non-standard-compiler, gcc-4.3

This package builds with a non standard compiler version; please check
if this package can be built with the default version of gcc/g++.

Please keep this report open until the package uses the default
compiler version for the package build.

The severity of this report is likely to be raised before the release.




--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Version: 2.6.34-1~experimental.2

On Wed, Aug 25, 2010 at 05:59:05 +0000, Matthias Klose wrote:

> This package builds with a non standard compiler version; please check
> if this package can be built with the default version of gcc/g++.
> 
> Please keep this report open until the package uses the default
> compiler version for the package build.
> 
Closing as fixed in experimental:

linux-2.6 (2.6.34-1~experimental.2) experimental; urgency=low
[...]
  * Make gcc-4.4 the default compiler

I'm not sure it's safe to change it for 2.6.32.

Cheers,
Julien

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


--- End Message ---

Reply to: