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

Bug#504870: marked as done (FTBFS with GCC 4.4: #elif used instead of #else)

Your message dated Wed, 13 Jan 2010 15:38:55 +0100
with message-id <201001131538.56017.holger@layer-acht.org>
and subject line Re: tags
has caused the Debian Bug report #504870,
regarding FTBFS with GCC 4.4: #elif used instead of #else
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

504870: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=504870
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: koffice
Version: 1:1.6.3-7
User: debian-gcc@lists.debian.org
Usertags: ftbfs-gcc-4.4
Tags: patch

Your package fails to build with the upcoming GCC 4.4.  Version 4.4
has not been released yet but I'm building with a snapshot in order
to find errors and give people an advance warning.

GCC 4.4 will introduce better checks in the preprocessor.  The problem
is pretty obvious: you're using a #elif without any condition when
you really want a #else.

You can reproduce this problem with gcc-snapshot from unstable.

> Automatic build of koffice_1:1.6.3-7 on em64t by sbuild/amd64 0.53
>  g++ -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I.. -I/build/tbm/koffice-1.6.3/./kspread -I/build/tbm/koffice-1.6.3/./lib/kofficeui -I../lib/kofficeui -I/build/tbm/koffice-1.6.3/./lib/kofficecore -I../lib/kofficecore -I/build/tbm/koffice-1.6.3/./lib/store -I../lib/store -I/build/tbm/koffice-1.6.3/./lib/kwmf -I../lib/kwmf -I/build/tbm/koffice-1.6.3/./lib/kopalette -I../lib/kopalette -I/build/tbm/koffice-1.6.3/./lib/kotext -I../lib/kotext -I/build/tbm/koffice-1.6.3/./lib/interfaces -I/build/tbm/koffice-1.6.3/./kspread/tests -Idialogs -I/build/tbm/koffice-1.6.3/./interfaces -I/build/tbm/koffice-1.6.3/./kchart/kdchart -I/usr/include/kde -I/usr/share/qt3/include -I. -DQT_THREAD_SUPPORT -D_REENTRANT -Wno-long-long -Wundef -ansi -D_XOPEN_SOURCE=500 -D_BSD_SOURCE -Wcast-align -Wchar-subscripts -Wall -W -Wpointer-arith -DNDEBUG -DNO_DEBUG -O2 -g -O2 -g -Wall -O2 -Wformat-security -Wmissing-format-attribute -Wno-non-virtual-dtor -fno-exceptions -fno-check-new -fno-common -DQT_CLEAN_NAMESPACE -DQT_NO_ASCII_CAST -DQT_NO_STL -DQT_NO_COMPAT -DQT_NO_TRANSLATION -DHAVE_KNEWSTUFF -c libkspreadcommon_la.all_cc.cc  -fPIC -DPIC -o .libs/libkspreadcommon_la.all_cc.o
> In file included from libkspreadcommon_la.all_cc.cc:2:
> /build/tbm/koffice-1.6.3/./kspread/digest.cc:53:6: error: #elif with no expression
> In file included from /usr/share/qt3/include/qdragobject.h:50,
>                  from /build/tbm/koffice-1.6.3/./kspread/kspread_sheet.h:26,

--- kspread/digest.cc~	2008-11-07 17:25:29.000000000 +0000
+++ kspread/digest.cc	2008-11-07 17:25:36.000000000 +0000
@@ -50,7 +50,7 @@
 #if  SIZEOF_INT == 4
 typedef unsigned int sal_uInt32;
 typedef unsigned long sal_uInt32;

Martin Michlmayr

--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
version: 1:2.1.0-1 


On Mittwoch, 13. Januar 2010, Ana Guerrero wrote:
> > will it come back from experimental? else I'd propose to close this
> > bug...
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-kde/2009/12/msg00099.html

Ah, gracias :)

> > I've tagged it sid+squeeze so it doesnt show up on
> > http://bugs.debian.org/release-critical/other/stable.html
> Maybe the tag experimental is not a good idea here and using versioned
> stuff is better, we can do 2 things:
> a) It is a removed package so close it as last version in unstable plus +rm
> b) Close it as fixed in experimental. In the unlikely case it is not, I
> will fix it in my next koffice upload due to this week.
> I like more b) but i think it still will confuse some scripts asummin the
> package is in unstable (so showing this problem affecting).

As you can see, I choose b) now.

> Also you have tagged other packages in similar cases. I guess you were
> tagging after doko's bug updates, but he did not look carefully and there
> is ton of false positives (e.g. #565009)

No, I'm cleaning up http://alioth.debian.org/~rhonda-guest/stable-RC.php from 
bugs not related to stable, but shown by the bts as if they were, cause the 
package has the same version in stable as in sid+squeeze.


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

--- End Message ---

Reply to: