Bruno Haible wrote: > Jim Meyering wrote: >> IMHO the latter (enhancing gcc) makes more sense. > > OK, I've reported it as a GCC bug here: > http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50154
Thanks!
Bruno Haible wrote: > Jim Meyering wrote: >> IMHO the latter (enhancing gcc) makes more sense. > > OK, I've reported it as a GCC bug here: > http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50154
Thanks!