On Fri, Sep 24, 2010 at 10:44:54PM -0700, Steve Kargl wrote:
> So, with the new bugzilla, how does one confirm a bug
> is a bug? If I click on the button next to the
> "status:" field, the selections listed are unconfirmed,
> new, assigned, suspended, waiting, and resolved. Where's
> the confirm
I've filed PR45773 concerning the new regression in gcj where java classes can
no longer be compiled with ecj.jar. Since r163770 (with r163814 backported to
fix
the libjava build), any attempt to compile a java source file with gcj produces
the error...
gcj --main=testme -O testme.java
Exceptio
On Sat, Sep 25, 2010 at 10:46:32AM +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 24, 2010 at 10:44:54PM -0700, Steve Kargl wrote:
> > So, with the new bugzilla, how does one confirm a bug
> > is a bug? If I click on the button next to the
> > "status:" field, the selections listed are unconfirmed,
>
On 25 September 2010 16:28, Steve Kargl
wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 25, 2010 at 10:46:32AM +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>> On Fri, Sep 24, 2010 at 10:44:54PM -0700, Steve Kargl wrote:
>> > So, with the new bugzilla, how does one confirm a bug
>> > is a bug? If I click on the button next to the
>> > "stat
On 25 September 2010 15:28, Steve Kargl wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 25, 2010 at 10:46:32AM +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>> On Fri, Sep 24, 2010 at 10:44:54PM -0700, Steve Kargl wrote:
>> > So, with the new bugzilla, how does one confirm a bug
>> > is a bug? If I click on the button next to the
>> > "statu
Thank you, Frédéric, despite a few bug reports the upgrade went very
smoothly and it's great that we have a modern version of Bugzilla now.
Was it a conscious decision for the "Add me to CC list" checkbox to be
ticked by default? It means that I get added to the CC list whenever
I comment on a bu
Le 25. 09. 10 17:10, Jonathan Wakely a écrit :
> Was it a conscious decision for the "Add me to CC list" checkbox to be
> ticked by default?
Yes, because most of the time, when you comment on a bug, other users
may react to your comment, or ask for more information, etc... In that
case, it's impor
2010/9/25 Frédéric Buclin:
> Le 25. 09. 10 17:10, Jonathan Wakely a écrit :
>> Was it a conscious decision for the "Add me to CC list" checkbox to be
>> ticked by default?
>
> Yes, because most of the time, when you comment on a bug, other users
> may react to your comment, or ask for more informat
Is this supposed to work (it seems to me that -gnatC is silently
ignored), and is the generated file format documented somewhere?
Hi All,
May the DECL_UID of any two local variables of two separated functions
be the same during LTO ?
Thanks,
Hongtao Yu
Purdue University
On Sat, Sep 25, 2010 at 16:40, Hongtao wrote:
> May the DECL_UID of any two local variables of two separated functions
> be the same during LTO ?
No. DECL_UIDs are unique within a single translation unit.
Diego.
On 09/25/10 16:48, Diego Novillo wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 25, 2010 at 16:40, Hongtao wrote:
>
>> May the DECL_UID of any two local variables of two separated functions
>> be the same during LTO ?
> No. DECL_UIDs are unique within a single translation unit.
>
OK, thanks. But it means there may be
On Sat, Sep 25, 2010 at 16:52, Hongtao wrote:
> OK, thanks. But it means there may be two local variables in
> different source files that can own the same DECL_UID, though LTO links
> the two source files together?
Sure, but when the bytecode files are instantiated during read-in,
lto1 will
Snapshot gcc-4.6-20100925 is now available on
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/4.6-20100925/
and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 4.6 SVN branch
with the following options: svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/trunk
Jonathan Wakely writes:
> Thank you, Frédéric, despite a few bug reports the upgrade went very
> smoothly and it's great that we have a modern version of Bugzilla now.
>
> Was it a conscious decision for the "Add me to CC list" checkbox to be
> ticked by default? It means that I get added to the
On 09/20/2010 09:58 AM, Rodrigo Rivas wrote:
This patch tries to implement the C++0x featue "Forward declarations
for enums" aka "opaque enum declarations":
Great! BTW, please send C++ patches to gcc-patches and CC me so that I
see them right away; I tend to fall behind on the mailing lists.
16 matches
Mail list logo
