> Do you see any value in testing the version 3 branch for these types of
> problems, or should we test the 2.95 branch?
I guess I only answered half your question. We should definitely make sure
the bugs triggered by the Hurd sources under -O3 get reported and fixed
before a GCC release is mad
> On Sun, Mar 11, 2001 at 07:10:29PM -0500, Roland McGrath wrote:
>
> > If you want to pursue this, you should probably get a recent development
> > snapshot of GCC and see if that crashes using -O3.
>
> Do you see any value in testing the version 3 branch for these types of
> problems, or shou
On Sun, Mar 11, 2001 at 07:10:29PM -0500, Roland McGrath wrote:
> If you want to pursue this, you should probably get a recent development
> snapshot of GCC and see if that crashes using -O3.
Do you see any value in testing the version 3 branch for these types of
problems, or should we test the
Congratulations, you have found a GCC bug. Run the compilation by hand
with -v -save-temps, and then take the -v output and the .i file and
include them in your bug report to the GCC folks.
Note that I tried Red Hat 7's version of gcc-2.96 and it also crashed on
some of the Hurd sources (thoug
Hi,
I have glibc 2.2.2 and gcc 2.95.3, and see this:
make[1]: Entering directory `/mnt/marcus/gnu/hurd/hurd/hurd-20010311/build/libdiskfs'
i386-gnu-gcc -O -Wall -g -O3 -I. -I../../libdiskfs -I.. -I../.. -I../../include
-D_GNU_SOURCE -c -o file-syncfs.o ../../libdiskfs/file-syn
Title: Do you want to capitalize on the Biotech Revolution
Do
you want to capitalize on the Biotech Revolution? Would you like to add
groundbreaking biotech, pharmaceutical and medical device companies to your
portfolio mix? Does hearing about exciting IPO and private placement offerings
fr
Neal H Walfield wrote:
> This patch makes Parted much more portable
Can you please resend the patch? I'm having lots of problems
applying it. I suspect it got mangled on the way... so could
you send it as a gzipped attachment?
Thanks,
Andrew Clausen
__
