This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Re: should we search $prefix/include ?

To: Per Bothner <per at bothner dot com>
Subject: Re: should we search $prefix/include ?
From: Phil Edwards <pedwards at disaster dot jaj dot com>
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2001 06:19:40 -0400
Cc: Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery dot com>, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
References: <m2iti5s4kk.fsf@kelso.bothner.com> <20010609163106D.mitchell@codesourcery.com> <m2bsnxrvzc.fsf@kelso.bothner.com>

On Sat, Jun 09, 2001 at 05:59:03PM -0700, Per Bothner wrote:
> Mark Mitchell <mark@codesourcery.com> writes:
> 
> > Please file a high-priority PR so that I don't forget about it.
> 
> I tried.  However, gccbug complained about setting the priority high.

By design.  As far as gccbug goes, PRs need to be submitted normally,
and then promoted to high priority.  (We were getting too many "stupid"
high-priority PRs from people who never read the bug-reporting instructions.)

Phil

-- 
pedwards at disaster dot jaj dot com  |  pme at sources dot redhat dot com
devphil at several other less interesting addresses in various dot domains
The gods do not protect fools.  Fools are protected by more capable fools.

References:
- should we search $prefix/include ?
  - From: Per Bothner
- Re: should we search $prefix/include ?
  - From: Mark Mitchell
- Re: should we search $prefix/include ?
  - From: Per Bothner

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]