On Tue, Jan 04, 2005 at 10:29:47AM +1100, Matthew Palmer wrote: > But what does that get you? Just that GCC is as broken (or not) as it was > previously. It doesn't actually tell you whether the problems reported are > spurious or serious, does it?
Please don't have this sort of discussion on -release. It's off-topic, and this is not a list suitable for general discussion. Thanks, -- Colin Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
