This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: fortran vs gfortran bugs in Bugzilla
- From: Paul Brook <paul at codesourcery dot com>
- To: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Cc: "Giovanni Bajo" <giovannibajo at libero dot it>
- Date: Thu, 13 May 2004 18:11:08 +0100
- Subject: Re: fortran vs gfortran bugs in Bugzilla
- Organization: CodeSourcery
- References: <0bbd01c438df$31006b30$7c4f2a97@bagio>
On Thursday 13 May 2004 12:41, Giovanni Bajo wrote:
> Right now, gfortran bugs are marked with a [gfortran] stomp in the summary,
> and put in the fortran component. I was wondering if we need to add a new
> component "gfortran" to Bugzilla for them.
> Paul Brook said this does not seem to be necessary because f77 is gone, but
> we are still currently supporting 3.3 and 3.4 so we will have to keep both
> f77 and f95 bugs for some time. Since the stomp in the subject is useless
> in this case, I would like to drop it, but then it becomes hard to query
> for all f77-only or f95-only bugs. Maybe a new component would help with
Maybe add [g77] to the g77 bugs?
There are only 3 open bugs which don't have gfortran in the subject line (well
actually 5, but two are typos).