tag 667341 - wontfix notfound 667341 1.0.7~2011w23.2-2 tag 667341 + help reassign 667341 gcc-4.7 retitle 667341 gcc-4.7 can omit to list C++ templates as symbols thanks I've done some testing with this bug during DebConf12 as I'm using Qt, qmake and c++ templates regularly at work and we may be interested in using qtmobility stuff in Wheezy at some point after the release. The function in question appears to be correctly defined in the .cpp and correctly declared in the .h. This remains correct when the files are passed through g++ -E. It just doesn't turn up in the output of objdump on the compiled .so file. I can see no evidence of the qmake build system configuration causing the symbol not to be listed. The code worked correctly with gcc-4.6 and I don't see how a correct symbol can be omitted from the link step when there have been no other changes other than the version of the compiler. Please clarify if this is not the case. The related serialize function which is declared on the line above the deserialize function in the header *does* get listed as a symbol and yet the declaration and definition of the serialize and the deserialize function offer no obvious reasons why only one would suddenly stop working with a change of compiler version. I aim to build a test file which can help isolate this issue during the rest of DebConf but I wanted to declare what I've already found in the bug report so that qmf does not get removed precipitously. > Fathi Boudra mentioned that he would file package removal bugs for qtmobility > for wheezy, therefore tagging as wontfix. Fathi, please can you qualify this with your reasons? If it's just that you don't have time for qmf and qtmobility, could you orphan it instead of seeking removal? By all means explain your reasons in the orphaning bug report (rather than in #667341 which has now been reassigned) but please do not seek removal of qmf and cause qtmobility to be removed unless there are particular problems with the packages themselves. I'd like to know if there are problems before I spend time researching the possible future role of these packages in my work. Thanks. -- Neil Williams ============= http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
Attachment:
pgp5mF1wBp_OE.pgp
Description: PGP signature