--- Comment #79 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-10 03:41
---
*** Bug 7935 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #6 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-10 03:41 ---
To close as a dup of bug 323.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 323 ***
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
Your message dated Wed, 9 Nov 2005 12:06:19 -0600
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line fixed in or before gcc-4.0_4.0.2-3
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your
On Wed, Nov 09, 2005 at 12:30:43PM +0100, Domenico Andreoli wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 08, 2005 at 04:27:53PM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 08, 2005 at 04:01:11PM +0100, Matthias Klose wrote:
> > >
> > > The proposal by upstream is to configure libstdc++ to use the new
> > > allocator agai
--- Comment #28 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-09 17:04
---
Fixed in 4.0.3.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Statu
--- Comment #27 from jason at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-09 16:58 ---
Subject: Bug 21123
Author: jason
Date: Wed Nov 9 16:58:52 2005
New Revision: 106698
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=106698
Log:
PR c++/21123
* method.c (use_thunk): Use build_c
Your message dated Wed, 9 Nov 2005 09:08:53 -0600
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line fixed in or before gcc-4.0_4.0.2-3
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your
Your message dated Wed, 9 Nov 2005 07:20:39 -0600
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line fixed in or before gcc-4.0_4.0.2-3
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your
On Tue, Nov 08, 2005 at 04:27:53PM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 08, 2005 at 04:01:11PM +0100, Matthias Klose wrote:
> > libstdc++6 is currently configured to use the mt allocator based on
> > discussions in April 2004 with upstream libstdc++ developers. This
> > configuration turned o
Drew Parsons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Current gcc is 4.0.2-1. Is the segfault in xprint -12 something you
> might expect to occur, and would a rebuilt with gcc 4.0.2 be likely to
> repair it?
Not very likely, but it should definitely be done before trying
anything else. Trying gcc-snapshot w
Dear powerpc and gcc developers,
some Xprint users have reported a segfault in Xprt ( bug #337570,
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=337570). running on
powerpc.
They report it occurs with xprint 0.1.0.alpha1-12, but not with -11 or
-10.
Checking the build logs at
http://buildd.de
11 matches
Mail list logo