Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> Ryan Hill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Was there ever any action on this? AFAICS consensus was that the trap
>> would be removed and this behaviour be documented as an extension.
>> There was a bit more discussion of how exactly the documentation would
>> be worded[i] and the thread petered out. Fast forwarding to today the
>> abort is still present and the 4.2 branch (4.2.0-pre20070317 (rev.
>> 123016)) is still unable to build a working openssl (0.9.8e).
> I don't think anything happened with this.
>
> Is there a gcc bug report open about it? If so, Mark can bump up the
> priority.
I couldn't find one so I've filed PR #31359. Apologies if it's a duplicate.
--
where to now? if i had to guess
dirtyepic gentoo org i'm afraid to say antarctica's next
9B81 6C9F E791 83BB 3AB3 5B2D E625 A073 8379 37E8 (0x837937E8)
