Your message dated Mon, 11 Feb 2013 06:22:36 +0000 with message-id <1360563756.24260.6.camel@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org> and subject line Re: Bug#699899: tpu: clang/3.0-6.1+deb7u0 has caused the Debian Bug report #699899, regarding unblock: clang/1:3.0-6.1 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.) -- 699899: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=699899 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
- To: submit@bugs.debian.org
- Cc: 693208@bugs.debian.org
- Subject: tpu: clang/3.0-6.1+deb7u0
- From: Michael Stapelberg <stapelberg@debian.org>
- Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2013 14:27:20 +0100
- Message-id: <20130206142720.6095925e@midna.rag.lan>
Package: release.debian.org Severity: normal User: release.debian.org@packages.debian.org Usertags: tpu Hello, I would like to upload clang/3.0-6.1+deb7u0 to testing-proposed-updates to fix #693208 in wheezy. At the moment, 3.0-6 is in testing, 3.1-8 is in unstable. #693208 is about clang failing to produce a trivial binarey on armhf. I have verified that the fixes work in an armhf qemu chroot. All patches have been merged upstream, too, so I am fairly confident they do the right thing. Since by now we have gcc-4.7 in Debian, I also needed to apply this patch from upstream, otherwise clang segfaults when building software (e.g. i3-wm): http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=11926#c17 The debdiff is attached. May I go ahead? -- Best regards, MichaelAttachment: clang.debdiff
Description: Binary data
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
- To: 699899-done@bugs.debian.org
- Cc: Michael Stapelberg <stapelberg@debian.org>, Sylvestre Ledru <sylvestre@debian.org>
- Subject: Re: Bug#699899: tpu: clang/3.0-6.1+deb7u0
- From: "Adam D. Barratt" <adam@adam-barratt.org.uk>
- Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2013 06:22:36 +0000
- Message-id: <1360563756.24260.6.camel@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org>
- In-reply-to: <1360512533.7444.22.camel@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org>
- References: <20130206142720.6095925e@midna.rag.lan> <1360183862.4494.7.camel@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org> <x68v71jfn8.fsf@midna.zekjur.net> <1360189639.4494.20.camel@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org> <x6zjzgialz.fsf@midna.zekjur.net> <x6obfwhx23.fsf@midna.zekjur.net> <5113F296.2030401@debian.org> <1360353593.24960.6.camel@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org> <x67gmggoj2.fsf@midna.zekjur.net> <1360512533.7444.22.camel@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org>
On Sun, 2013-02-10 at 16:08 +0000, Adam D. Barratt wrote: > On Sun, 2013-02-10 at 16:46 +0100, Michael Stapelberg wrote: > > "Adam D. Barratt" <adam@adam-barratt.org.uk> writes: > > > Given that 3.1 appears never to have managed to build on several > > > architectures in unstable (a regression in each case) and that I assume > > > the intention would be to introduce 3.2 to unstable after the release, > > > then if Sylvestre's not opposed reintroducing a fixed 3.0 to sid > > > temporarily may be the sanest answer. > > I just uploaded 1:3.0-6.1 to unstable. I presume you want me to close > > this bug and open an unblock request instead, right? :) > > Nah, let's just re-use this one; thanks. Unblocked; thanks. Regards, Adam
--- End Message ---