Philip Blundell writes:
> On Sun, 2002-06-09 at 20:26, Martin v. Loewis wrote:
> > I don't think that a Debian bug report is the right place to "push" a
> > patch into gcc (i.e. to lobby for it).
> >
> > Instead, you should assume that all patches that have been submitted
> > to gcc-patches are im
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hello Daniel,
> > Torsten Knodt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > thats not what I wanted to do. I think IBM and the other big users
> > > of this patch, will do this themselves. But I think in the meantime
> > > it would be a win to debian. Yes, it's
On Sun, 2002-06-09 at 20:26, Martin v. Loewis wrote:
> I don't think that a Debian bug report is the right place to "push" a
> patch into gcc (i.e. to lobby for it).
>
> Instead, you should assume that all patches that have been submitted
> to gcc-patches are implicitly Debian bug reports which al
On Sun, Jun 09, 2002 at 10:40:11PM +0200, Martin v. Loewis wrote:
> Torsten Knodt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > thats not what I wanted to do. I think IBM and the other big users
> > of this patch, will do this themselves. But I think in the meantime
> > it would be a win to debian. Yes, it's
Torsten Knodt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> thats not what I wanted to do. I think IBM and the other big users
> of this patch, will do this themselves. But I think in the meantime
> it would be a win to debian. Yes, it's mostly not a good idea to
> have features patches in the debian diff, but th
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hello Martin,
> I don't think that a Debian bug report is the right place to "push" a
> patch into gcc (i.e. to lobby for it).
thats not what I wanted to do. I think IBM and the other big users of this
patch, will do this themselves. But I think in th
Torsten Knodt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Link to the announcement on gcc-patches:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2001-06/msg01753.html
I don't think that a Debian bug report is the right place to "push" a
patch into gcc (i.e. to lobby for it).
Instead, you should assume that all patches
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hello,
> > I think there should be a gcc version with stack protection patch
> > included. The patch was sent in the gcc patches mailing list. Perhaps a
> > single version is enough, as the patch can be (completly ?) disabled.
> Please include a pointe
On Sun, 2002-06-09 at 18:38, Torsten Knodt wrote:
> I think there should be a gcc version with stack protection patch included.
> The patch was sent in the gcc patches mailing list. Perhaps a single version
> is enough, as the patch can be (completly ?) disabled.
Please include a pointer to the pa
Package: gcc-2.95
Version: 1:2.95.4-9
Severity: wishlist
Hello,
I think there should be a gcc version with stack protection patch included.
The patch was sent in the gcc patches mailing list. Perhaps a single version
is enough, as the patch can be (completly ?) disabled.
With kind regards
10 matches
Mail list logo
