This is the mail archive of the
gcc-regression@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: 3 GCC regressions, 1 new, with your patch on2001-07-31T17:59:14Z.
- To: Geoff Keating <geoffk at redhat dot com>
- Subject: Re: 3 GCC regressions, 1 new, with your patch on2001-07-31T17:59:14Z.
- From: Daniel Berlin <dan at cgsoftware dot com>
- Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2001 18:30:51 -0400
- cc: gcc-regression at gcc dot gnu dot org, dje at watson dot ibm dot com
- References: <200107312107.OAA06214@geoffk.org>
--On Tuesday, July 31, 2001 2:07 PM -0700 Geoff Keating <geoffk@geoffk.org>
wrote:
>> Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2001 16:27:30 -0400
>> From: Daniel Berlin <dan@cgsoftware.com>
>> Content-Disposition: inline
>>
>> Hmmm.
>>
>> I'm not sure what i can do about this.
>> It's not a bug in the patches, per se.
>
> Can you clarify? It sure looks like a bug, so how do you know it's
> not your patches?
Because I tested it with a source tree updated two days ago, and it worked
fine.
I had tested it for about a month, every few days, before then.
> If it's not your patches, what does cause it?
I'm working on it.
Ah, here it is.
Should have looked at my laptop, which i haven't been on since this morning.
An accidental small merge botch I had tried to commit a fix for right after
the main diff (fingers move faster than brain, i shift ZZ'd in the wrong
window, committing, instead of saving the new rs6000.h) failed because the
file wasn't up to date.
Recommitted.
So it's not a real bug in the patches, just operator error.
Sorry about that.