------- Comment #7 from bangerth at dealii dot org 2007-02-12 00:02 -------
(In reply to comment #6)
> I immediately believe that Andrew's and Wolfgang's findings are accurate, but
> I
> never claimed that the mainline has a problem. I never even tried it.
I didn't want to imply that there was no problem. It just appeared as if
neither Andrew nor I had a recent 4.2.x build around.
The person who has the infrastructure for finding regressions is Janis. Janis,
are you in a position of confirming this PR and finding where on the branch
the problem was introduced? (The PR gives pretty specific dates already.)
W.
>
> My interest it to make sure that our code works with any new gcc release,
> since
> that's what the OS makers pick up, and then we are stuck with the remaining
> bugs for 5+ years.
>
> It looks like a gcc 4.2 release is imminent, therefore I'm testing with the
> corresponding branch.
>
> From other bug reports I know that you have a "regression hunt" procedure. Is
> there any way I can submit my reproducer to the hunter? We have a fairly small
> time bracket already, given by Andrew's 4.2 test and the day this bug was
> opened. Therefore it would seem straightforward to find the checkin which
> caused the problem.
>
> I'll repeat my test with the current 4.2 branch and post my results here.
>
--
bangerth at dealii dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |janis at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30567
