https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9071
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org,
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2005-09-18 01:15:38 |2005-12-18 00:36:07
date||
--- Additional Comments From neil at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-02-04 10:26
---
Nothing to do with CPP.
--
What|Removed |Added
Component|preprocessor|
Ages ago I suggested a fix to the gcc bug tracking system that would
work for everyone and avoid this stupid situation where everybody's bug
tracking system has to include individual workarounds for every other
bug tracking system: simply make your Bugzilla ignore mails it receives
with the Precede
On Mon, Jan 19, 2004 at 11:32:29PM +0100, Matthias Klose wrote:
> Maybe this was changed with the move of the Debian BTS to the new
> host? Could the same change be made on spohr?
No, my memory is that the mail loops appeared to have stopped ages ago
so I removed the workaround. Certainly the work
Hi,
Maybe this was changed with the move of the Debian BTS to the new
host? Could the same change be made on spohr?
Thanks, Matthias
--- Begin Message ---
--- Additional Comments From dberlin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-01-19
21:08 ---
They are auto-replies from debian's bug system.
--- Additional Comments From dhazeghi at yahoo dot com 2004-01-19 21:05
---
I'm not sure what the last 4 messages in the PR are, but they're not
particularly useful to us. Could gcc-bugs be taken off the cc: list for them?
Thanks.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9071
--- Additional Comments From owner at bugs dot debian dot org 2004-01-19
21:10 ---
Subject: Bug#122103: Info received (was Warning for blocks not closed in same
file as opened in)
Thank you for the additional information you have supplied regarding
this problem report. It has been
--- Additional Comments From dberlin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-01-19
21:08 ---
They are auto-replies from debian's bug system.
I changed the bug reporter so it would stop the mail loop.
I wish the debian guys would stop putting auto-responders as the owners of bugs.
There are quite a
--- Additional Comments From owner at bugs dot debian dot org 2004-01-19
20:51 ---
Subject: Bug#122103: Info received (was Warning for blocks not closed in same
file as opened in)
Thank you for the additional information you have supplied regarding
this problem report. It has been
--- Additional Comments From owner at bugs dot debian dot org 2004-01-19
20:39 ---
Subject: Bug#122103: Info received (was Warning for blocks not closed in same
file as opened in)
Thank you for the additional information you have supplied regarding
this problem report. It has been
--- Additional Comments From owner at bugs dot debian dot org 2004-01-19
20:21 ---
Subject: Bug#122103: Info received (was Warning for blocks not closed in same
file as opened in)
Thank you for the additional information you have supplied regarding
this problem report. It has been
--- Additional Comments From owner at bugs dot debian dot org 2004-01-19
20:08 ---
Subject: Bug#122103: Info received (was Warning for blocks not closed in same
file as opened in)
Thank you for the additional information you have supplied regarding
this problem report. It has been
--- Additional Comments From owner at bugs dot debian dot org 2004-01-19
19:51 ---
Subject: Bug#122103: Info received (was Warning for blocks not closed in same
file as opened in)
Thank you for the additional information you have supplied regarding
this problem report. It has been
--
What|Removed |Added
Component|c |preprocessor
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9071
--- You are receiving this mail because: --
--
What|Removed |Added
Component|preprocessor|c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9071
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You r
PLEASE REPLY TO [EMAIL PROTECTED] ONLY, *NOT* [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9071
pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu changed:
What|Removed |Added
PLEASE REPLY TO [EMAIL PROTECTED] ONLY, *NOT* [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9071
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAI
PLEASE REPLY TO [EMAIL PROTECTED] ONLY, *NOT* [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9071
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2003-05-26 21:49 ---
Hello,
can you provide a small testcase for this problem? And if possible verify that
this is still the
PLEASE REPLY TO [EMAIL PROTECTED] ONLY, *NOT* [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9071
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNC
Thank you very much for your problem report.
It has the internal identification `other/9071'.
The individual assigned to look at your
report is: unassigned.
>Category: other
>Responsible:unassigned
>Synopsis: Warning for blocks not closed in same file as opened in
>Submitter-Id: net
>Originator:Anthony DeRobertis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Organization: The Debian Project
>Confidential: no
>Synopsis:
>Severity: non-critical
>Priority: low
>Category: other
>Class: change-request
>Release: 3.2.1 (Debian) (Debian unstable)
>
Package: g++-3.0
Version: 1:3.0.2-3
Severity: wishlist
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Accidentally leaving the close brace off of a block in e.g., a header
file will often result in errors in files that include it, without any
indication of what is wrong. For example, leaving a nam
23 matches
Mail list logo
