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

Bug#356436: marked as done (FTBFS with G++ 4.1: explicit instantiation of 'class BasicList ...)

Your message dated Thu, 12 Apr 2007 23:58:49 +0200
with message-id <20070412215849.GA7830@ngolde.de>
and subject line (no subject)
has caused the attached Bug report 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 I am
talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration
somewhere.  Please contact me immediately.)

Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)

--- Begin Message ---
Package: nurbs++
Version: 3.0.11-6
Severity: important

Your package fails to build with G++ 4.1.  I'm filing this bug as
important for now, but when 4.1 will be the default compiler in
unstable (probably in a few weeks) I'll upgrade this to serious.

> Automatic build of nurbs++_3.0.11-6 on bigsur by sbuild/mips 1.89
>  g++ -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I. -I../include -I../include -I../matrix -I../image -I../numerical -g -O2 -fno-implicit-templates -MT f_surface.lo -MD -MP -MF .deps/f_surface.Tpo -c f_surface.cpp  -fPIC -DPIC -o .libs/f_surface.o
> f_surface.cpp:28: error: explicit instantiation of 'class BasicList<PLib::InterPoint<float, 2> >' in namespace 'PLib' (which does not enclose namespace '::')
> f_surface.cpp:29: error: explicit instantiation of 'class BasicList<PLib::InterPoint<float, 3> >' in namespace 'PLib' (which does not enclose namespace '::')
> make[2]: *** [f_surface.lo] Error 1

Martin Michlmayr

--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
this bug is fixed.
Kind regards

Nico Golde - http://ngolde.de - nion@jabber.ccc.de - GPG: 0x73647CFF
For security reasons, all text in this mail is double-rot13 encrypted.

Attachment: pgptsJ8AH3QAu.pgp
Description: PGP signature

--- End Message ---

Reply to: