This is the mail archive of the
gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: pending/5283: [testcase] BTW, c++/5282 is different than c++/5238
- From: Mark Swanson <swansma at yahoo dot com>
- To: nobody at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Cc: gcc-prs at gcc dot gnu dot org,
- Date: 5 Jan 2002 04:36:02 -0000
- Subject: Re: pending/5283: [testcase] BTW, c++/5282 is different than c++/5238
- Reply-to: Mark Swanson <swansma at yahoo dot com>
The following reply was made to PR pending/5283; it has been noted by GNATS.
From: Mark Swanson <swansma@yahoo.com>
To: rodrigc@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org,
nobody@gcc.gnu.org, swansma@yahoo.com, gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org
Cc:
Subject: Re: pending/5283: [testcase] BTW, c++/5282 is different than c++/5238
Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2002 23:21:38 -0500
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On January 4, 2002 11:18 pm, you wrote:
> Synopsis: [testcase] BTW, c++/5282 is different than c++/5238
>
> State-Changed-From-To: open->closed
> State-Changed-By: rodrigc
> State-Changed-When: Fri Jan 4 20:18:10 2002
> State-Changed-Why:
> Not the correct way to add information to a PR.
> Go to:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/gnatsweb.pl?cmd=view&database=gcc&pr=5282
>
> and click on "send e-mail to interested parties"
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/gnatsweb.pl?cmd=view%20audit-trail&database=gcc&;
>pr=5283
Thanks for the response. But, what makes you think I didn't do that? The SMTP
To: header should prove I did exactly that.
?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org
iD8DBQE8Nn9XP6+Az0OIt2IRAoKsAJ4s70oNPoyZYpdIyOfWzVDtPVEVzACfQKJm
hF0VseT0JzUpkP1W9OsmrmU=
=m0HC
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----