> On Wed, 21 Sep 2016, Frank Heckenbach wrote:
> > I've just experienced another such case after gcc-4.9 was "removed"
> > (#785249, which was reported upstream, and probably a whole more,
> > some of which are probably lost now).
>
> These all still exist, and generally speaking, they get reassig
On Wed, 21 Sep 2016, Frank Heckenbach wrote:
> I've just experienced another such case after gcc-4.9 was "removed"
> (#785249, which was reported upstream, and probably a whole more,
> some of which are probably lost now).
These all still exist, and generally speaking, they get reassigned to
the n
I've just experienced another such case after gcc-4.9 was "removed"
(#785249, which was reported upstream, and probably a whole more,
some of which are probably lost now).
PS: It's quite ironic that a bug report in which I also complained
about so many Debian bug reports sitting idly in the bug da
Package: bugs.debian.org
Severity: normal
Consider bugs such as #588087 and #593086 which I reported some
years ago against then-current gcc-4.4 and which were recently
closed when gcc-4.4 was removed from Debian.
However, the bugs haven't actually been fixed. I've checked that
both still exist i
4 matches
Mail list logo
