On Thursday 18 August 2011 11:59:36 Tobias Burnus wrote: > The patch should be rather simple and self explaining. It is indeed with the extra context.
> > Build and regtested on x86-64-linux. > OK for the trunk? Yes. > > I wonder how far we should backport; the program is said to work in > 4.1.2 and 4.2.5, but to fail in 4.3.6 up to the trunk. Oldest maintained > GCC is 4.4.6. The patch is relatively simple, but as the long time > between breakage and report shows, it does not seem to affect many users. > > I think we should backport the patch at least to 4.6 and 4.5 , makes sense. > but one could also consider 4.4 or even 4.3. What do you think? It looks like a real bug, with a simple fix, so I would say 4.4 too. About 4.3, as it is unmaintained, we are not supposed to backport patches for it? Mikael
