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]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: g++.pt/repo3.C regression between 3.1.1 and 3.2?

From: Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery dot com>
To: Franz Sirl <Franz dot Sirl-kernel at lauterbach dot com>, "gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
Cc: "jason at redhat dot com" <jason at redhat dot com>, "nathan at codesourcery dot com" <nathan at codesourcery dot com>
Date: Tue, 06 Aug 2002 15:09:16 -0700
Subject: Re: g++.pt/repo3.C regression between 3.1.1 and 3.2?

--On Tuesday, August 06, 2002 10:49:08 PM +0200 Franz Sirl <Franz.Sirl-kernel@lauterbach.com> wrote:

On Dienstag, 6. August 2002 22:23, Mark Mitchell wrote:

--On Tuesday, August 06, 2002 10:13:11 PM +0200 Franz Sirl

<Franz.Sirl-kernel@lauterbach.com> wrote:
> On Dienstag, 6. August 2002 21:52, Mark Mitchell wrote:
>> >> I believe so.  I thought Jason reviewed them.
>> >
>> > There were no replies that reached me or the archives.
>>
>> Do you have your original message handy for this one too?
>
> Uhm, for which one? I don't understand what you are referring too.

The bitfields.C bug.

Ah, silly me.

This probably is just a simple testcase coding problem, I shouldn't have
mentioned it in the 3.2 context.

Thanks; that is indeed harmless.

I think this leaves the version number thing as the sole remaining block
for 3.2.

--
Mark Mitchell                mark@codesourcery.com
CodeSourcery, LLC            http://www.codesourcery.com

References:
- Re: g++.pt/repo3.C regression between 3.1.1 and 3.2?
  - From: Franz Sirl

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