On Mon, 22 May 2023 at 12:09, Ipshita Srivastava via Gcc
wrote:
>
> I don't want to receive further emails.
Use https://gcc.gnu.org/lists.html#subscribe to unsubscribe yourself.
I don't want to receive further emails.
po to show the
>>> intention
>>> to be upstream with GCC someday.
>>>
>>> [snip]
>>>
>>> Separately, some contributors have expressed interest in
>>> maintaining the
>>> GCC style communications of using a mailin
On Thu, 3 Jun 2021, Martin Liška via Overseers wrote:
> On 6/2/21 4:52 PM, Frank Ch. Eigler via Gcc wrote:
>> If you use Sender:-based filtering for sorting your incoming email
>> stream, I suggest switching to observing List-Id: instead, or else
>> using a regexp/substring style of Sender: matchin
On 6/3/21 5:10 PM, D. Hugh Redelmeier wrote:
| From: Martin Liška
| Which we recommend in the ection Filtering here:
| https://gcc.gnu.org/lists.html
Thanks for the useful information.
That document suggests:
* ^List-Id: .*<.*.gcc.gnu.org>$
Surely this should be:
* ^List-Id: .*<.*.gcc\.g
| From: Martin Liška
| Which we recommend in the ection Filtering here:
| https://gcc.gnu.org/lists.html
Thanks for the useful information.
That document suggests:
* ^List-Id: .*<.*.gcc.gnu.org>$
Surely this should be:
* ^List-Id: .*<.*.gcc\.gnu\.org>$
On 6/2/21 4:52 PM, Frank Ch. Eigler via Gcc wrote:
If you use Sender:-based filtering for sorting your incoming email
stream, I suggest switching to observing List-Id: instead, or else
using a regexp/substring style of Sender: matching.
Which we recommend in the ection Filtering here:
https://g
Hi -
I made an experimental configuration change on sourceware/gcc.gnu.org
yesterday that had unforeseen effects on some mailing list
subscribers. We turned on VERP (variable envelope return paths) on
outgoing mail from mailman, in order to assist tracking mail delivery
problems. This changes
On 10/7/20 8:52 AM, Martin Liška via Overseers wrote:
My commit 190c04ba36d9c6c3dce41f12012aa97c6d7f22f5 is missing in the
mailing list (and so was not propagated to the corresponding PR):
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-cvs/2020-October/date.html
There's previous and next commit:
[gc
My commit 190c04ba36d9c6c3dce41f12012aa97c6d7f22f5 is missing in the
mailing list (and so was not propagated to the corresponding PR):
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-cvs/2020-October/date.html
There's previous and next commit:
[gcc r11-3678] [PATCH][GCC] arm: Move iterators from mve.
Hi Frank,
>> Would it be possible to provide this feature for the current archives,
>> too? [...]
>
> rsync now makes available the master .mbox files for every mailing
> list hosted on sourceware:
>
>rsync gcc.gnu.org::gcc-mbox
>
> This includes historic
Hi -
> Would it be possible to provide this feature for the current archives,
> too? [...]
rsync now makes available the master .mbox files for every mailing
list hosted on sourceware:
rsync gcc.gnu.org::gcc-mbox
This includes historical ezmlm era files as well as the new.
- FChE
Before the sourcware upgrade, it was possible to incrementally copy the
mailing list archives using rsync. This is still advertised on
https://gcc.gnu.org/rsync.html
but this only includes the pre-upgrade archives.
Would it be possible to provide this feature for the current archives
On Apr 10 2020, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
> How do you access that data base ? NNTP ?
Yes, at news.gmane.io.
Andreas.
--
Andreas Schwab, sch...@linux-m68k.org
GPG Key fingerprint = 7578 EB47 D4E5 4D69 2510 2552 DF73 E780 A9DA AEC1
"And now for something completely different."
On 4/10/20 9:06 AM, Andreas Schwab wrote:
> On Apr 10 2020, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
>
>> Interesting point with gmane.io, do they have a web-interface?
>
> No.
>
Hmm. Not good.
How do you access that data base ? NNTP ?
Bernd.
> Andreas.
>
On Apr 10 2020, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
> Interesting point with gmane.io, do they have a web-interface?
No.
Andreas.
--
Andreas Schwab, sch...@linux-m68k.org
GPG Key fingerprint = 7578 EB47 D4E5 4D69 2510 2552 DF73 E780 A9DA AEC1
"And now for something completely different."
On 4/2/20 10:06 AM, Andreas Schwab wrote:
> On Apr 02 2020, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
>
>> What happens to the e-mails when they are not archive, but forwarded
>> to the subscribers, like mark.info who just subscribes the mails,
>> and archived them they have a lot of hard disks for that and can
>>
> On Fri, 3 Apr 2020 at 18:45, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Hi,
> >>>>
> >>>> I have a question about the gcc-testresults mailing list,
> >>>> that is I see everyone using:
> >>>>
> >>>&g
On 4/3/20 7:56 PM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On Fri, 3 Apr 2020 at 18:55, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On 4/3/20 7:50 PM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>>> On Fri, 3 Apr 2020 at 18:45, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi,
>&g
On 4/3/20 7:57 PM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On Fri, 3 Apr 2020 at 18:54, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
>>
>> On 4/3/20 7:50 PM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>>> On Fri, 3 Apr 2020 at 18:45, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>>
On Fri, 3 Apr 2020 at 18:54, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
>
> On 4/3/20 7:50 PM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> > On Fri, 3 Apr 2020 at 18:45, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> I have a question about the gcc-testresults mailing list,
> >>
On Fri, 3 Apr 2020 at 18:55, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
>
>
>
> On 4/3/20 7:50 PM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> > On Fri, 3 Apr 2020 at 18:45, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> I have a question about the gcc-testresults mailing list,
>
On 4/3/20 7:50 PM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On Fri, 3 Apr 2020 at 18:45, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I have a question about the gcc-testresults mailing list,
>> that is I see everyone using:
>>
>> [re
On 4/3/20 7:50 PM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On Fri, 3 Apr 2020 at 18:45, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I have a question about the gcc-testresults mailing list,
>> that is I see everyone using:
>>
>> [releases/gcc-9 revision
>> 02a201f71
On Fri, 3 Apr 2020 at 18:45, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I have a question about the gcc-testresults mailing list,
> that is I see everyone using:
>
> [releases/gcc-9 revision
> 02a201f71:0f58d3b54:0e66150084aa217811a5c45fb15e98d7ed3e8839]
>
> or
>
Hi,
I have a question about the gcc-testresults mailing list,
that is I see everyone using:
[releases/gcc-9 revision
02a201f71:0f58d3b54:0e66150084aa217811a5c45fb15e98d7ed3e8839]
or
[master revision
63b2923dc6f:0c89e976db9:1c16f7fc903c1c1c912faf7889b69d83429b7b2e
what is the first 2 hashes
On 3/9/20 11:25 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Mon, Mar 09, 2020 at 10:46:31AM +0100, Tobias Burnus wrote:
Hi Thomas, hi Overseers
I can confirm that those are stripped off!
I did sent an email with three attachments:
* test.txt (text/plain)
* test.diff (text/x-diff)
* the company's disclaimer
T
ess clearly says, you should contact him
> via the list, not his personal address. And the relevant list is the
> overseers one, not this one.
FWIW I think in that case it would also be polite to include a `Reply-To'
header indicating the mailing list to use. Or just plain use the
t;>>>> On 3/26/20 4:16 PM, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> marc.info is an independent site that is not associated with
>>>>>>> sourceware.org. We don't control it. If you have questions about their
>>>
gt;>>>
>>>>>> marc.info is an independent site that is not associated with
>>>>>> sourceware.org. We don't control it. If you have questions about their
>>>>>> site then ask them.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
try to reach him
> personally, rather than via the list. It's perfectly reasonable to say
> "please use the mailing list instead of emailing me personally". I do
> that all the time when people reply to me off-list after looking for
> help on gcc-help.
>
Ah, okay, I
marc.info is an independent site that is not associated with
>>>>> sourceware.org. We don't control it. If you have questions about their
>>>>> site then ask them.
>>>>>
>>>>> The mailing list software is all easily discernible by investigatin
should contact him
via the list, not his personal address. And the relevant list is the
overseers one, not this one.
> I'd call that impolite.
No, it's impolite to ignore his request and try to reach him
personally, rather than via the list. It's perfectly reasonable to say
&quo
ware.org. We don't control it. If you have questions about their
>>>> site then ask them.
>>>>
>>>> The mailing list software is all easily discernible by investigating
>>>> email headers and via google but someone else answered your questio
On Apr 02 2020, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
> What happens to the e-mails when they are not archive, but forwarded
> to the subscribers, like mark.info who just subscribes the mails,
> and archived them they have a lot of hard disks for that and can
> handle attachments quite well. The point is previou
On 4/2/20 7:13 AM, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 01, 2020 at 09:57:05PM -0700, Unidef Defshrizzle wrote:
>> We can setup a command line interface, maybe using CURSES, I mean GUIs are
>> fun, but Jesus Christ they’re full of surprises
>
> Command line interface to what?
>
> You can read
all that impolite. If you know how to reach them, please
>make them aware of this issue, because it is a security relevant
>issue. Seriously.
overseers is a mailing list. You can send email to it @ either the
gcc.gnu.org or sourceware.org domains. It will be read by the small
number of *v
On Wed, Apr 01, 2020 at 09:57:05PM -0700, Unidef Defshrizzle wrote:
>We can setup a command line interface, maybe using CURSES, I mean GUIs are
>fun, but Jesus Christ they’re full of surprises
Command line interface to what?
You can read email using whatever interface your want. Archives are
obv
We can setup a command line interface, maybe using CURSES, I mean GUIs are
fun, but Jesus Christ they’re full of surprises
On Wed, Apr 1, 2020 at 8:35 PM Bernd Edlinger
wrote:
> On 4/2/20 1:41 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> > On Wed, 1 Apr 2020 at 23:54, Joseph Myers wrote:
> >>
> >> On Wed, 1 Apr
On 4/2/20 1:41 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On Wed, 1 Apr 2020 at 23:54, Joseph Myers wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, 1 Apr 2020, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
>>
>>> PS: I have a discovered a very serious problem with the mailing lists
>>> that must be fixed by our overseers.
>>>
>>> That is the scubbed attachments.
On 4/2/20 12:54 AM, Joseph Myers wrote:
> On Wed, 1 Apr 2020, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
>
>> PS: I have a discovered a very serious problem with the mailing lists
>> that must be fixed by our overseers.
>>
>> That is the scubbed attachments.
>>
>> As an example please look at this one:
>> https://m
On Wed, 1 Apr 2020 at 23:54, Joseph Myers wrote:
>
> On Wed, 1 Apr 2020, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
>
> > PS: I have a discovered a very serious problem with the mailing lists
> > that must be fixed by our overseers.
> >
> > That is the scubbed attachments.
> >
> > As an example please look at this one:
On Wed, 1 Apr 2020 at 21:30, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
> @overseeers: PLEASE STOP IMMEDIATELY THAT SCRUBBING
You're emailing the gcc list about the gdb-patches mailing list, and
haven't CC'd the overseers list or the gdb list.
> can you act now, or do you need a CVE number
On Wed, 1 Apr 2020, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
> PS: I have a discovered a very serious problem with the mailing lists
> that must be fixed by our overseers.
>
> That is the scubbed attachments.
>
> As an example please look at this one:
> https://marc.info/?l=gdb-patches&m=158571308379946&w=2
The c
e questions about their
>>> site then ask them.
>>>
>>> The mailing list software is all easily discernible by investigating
>>> email headers and via google but someone else answered your questions
>>> later in this thread.
>>>
>>
>>
t is fort...@gcc.gnu.org
>>>
>>> There is no gcc-help on marc.info
>>> There is https://marc.info/?l=gcc
>>> but there is no gdb-patches
>>>
>>> what needs to be done to host those lists on marc.info as well?
>>>
>>> What
On Sat, 2020-03-28 at 18:46 +, Maciej W. Rozycki wrote:
> On Fri, 27 Mar 2020, Jeff Law via Gcc wrote:
>
> > As an ex IT guy, I've gone both directions depending on the project I was
> > supporting and certainly see the pros and cons of going highly customized vs
> > as
> > generic as possible
On Sat, Mar 28, 2020 at 06:46:54PM +, Maciej W. Rozycki wrote:
>I think being software developers we are in this comfortable position
>that we can actually make changes to software ourselves if we find
>problems or usability issues...
>
>For example I found it useful on a couple of occasions t
On Fri, 27 Mar 2020, Jeff Law via Gcc wrote:
> As an ex IT guy, I've gone both directions depending on the project I was
> supporting and certainly see the pros and cons of going highly customized vs
> as
> generic as possible. In my opinion Chris & Frank are doing the right thing
> here
> and
> On Fri, Mar 27, 2020 at 07:00:59AM +0100, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
>>PS: I would CC you, Christopher Faylor, but your email address is
>>"cgf-use-the-mailinglist-ple...@gnu.org", so whatever I send there
>>would not reach you.
>
> Well duh? Not being cc'ed is the literal point of the email address.
On Fri, 2020-03-27 at 10:45 -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 27, 2020 at 07:00:59AM +0100, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
> > PS: I would CC you, Christopher Faylor, but your email address is
> > "cgf-use-the-mailinglist-ple...@gnu.org", so whatever I send there
> > would not reach you.
>
> W
On Fri, Mar 27, 2020 at 07:00:59AM +0100, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
>PS: I would CC you, Christopher Faylor, but your email address is
>"cgf-use-the-mailinglist-ple...@gnu.org", so whatever I send there
>would not reach you.
Well duh? Not being cc'ed is the literal point of the email address.
Anyway
sorry, to hear that. Of course you can take a few days off.
I do not think that it is the end of the world, when we solve the
mailing list problems in a week or two for instance.
Thanks
Bernd.
> cgf
>
On 3/25/20 10:07 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 25, 2020 at 09:03:15PM +, Jonathan Wakely via Gcc wrote:
>> See the link at the bottom of every page in the old archive:
>> http://www.mhonarc.org/
>>
>>> what is the exact problem that prevents it from being used any longer?
>>
>> It's
https://marc.info/?l=gcc-fortran
>> note the unsystematic name gcc-fortran, the list is fort...@gcc.gnu.org
>>
>> There is no gcc-help on marc.info
>> There is https://marc.info/?l=gcc
>> but there is no gdb-patches
>>
>> what needs to be done to host those lis
On Wed, Mar 25, 2020 at 09:34:16PM +0100, Dmitry Mikushin wrote:
>Maybe the best form of question is: Could the Overseer be so kind to
>release the dump of the original old mailing list on any free public file
>server?
The old archives are still available via their old URLs, e.
>
>what needs to be done to host those lists on marc.info as well?
>
>What needs to be done to host these lists on spinics for instance,
>or what else exists that can be used to search the messages?
marc.info is an independent site that is not associated with
sourceware.org. We don't control it. If you have questions about their
site then ask them.
The mailing list software is all easily discernible by investigating
email headers and via google but someone else answered your questions
later in this thread.
On 3/25/20 9:29 PM, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
> Could you add a link to https://marc.info/?l=gcc-patches
Why is above link no longer updating
this is the last message there:
1. 2020-03-07 [5] [PATCH] c++: Fix ABI issue with alignas on armv7hl [P
gcc-patch Jason Merrill
is this a push or a pull wh
On Wed, Mar 25, 2020 at 09:03:15PM +, Jonathan Wakely via Gcc wrote:
> See the link at the bottom of every page in the old archive:
> http://www.mhonarc.org/
>
> > what is the exact problem that prevents it from being used any longer?
>
> It's not packaged for RHEL 8.
It is in EPEL8:
https:/
On Wed, 25 Mar 2020 at 20:29, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
>
> -On 3/25/20 7:55 PM, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 25, 2020 at 04:23:02PM +0700, Arseny Solokha wrote:
> >> I believe the canonical place for the "Linux suff" mailing lists these
> >> days is
> >> lore.kernel.org, powered by publi
Maybe the best form of question is: Could the Overseer be so kind to
release the dump of the original old mailing list on any free public file
server?
ср, 25 мар. 2020 г. в 21:29, Bernd Edlinger :
> -On 3/25/20 7:55 PM, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 25, 2020 at 04:23:0
-On 3/25/20 7:55 PM, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 25, 2020 at 04:23:02PM +0700, Arseny Solokha wrote:
>> I believe the canonical place for the "Linux suff" mailing lists these days
>> is
>> lore.kernel.org, powered by public-inbox[1]. ISTM that software can address
>> most
>> if not al
On Wed, Mar 25, 2020 at 04:23:02PM +0700, Arseny Solokha wrote:
>I believe the canonical place for the "Linux suff" mailing lists these days is
>lore.kernel.org, powered by public-inbox[1]. ISTM that software can address
>most
>if not all needs of those involved in GCC development and even has NNT
>
>>> There are at least two existing threads on this topic.
>>>
>>
>> Sigh, yes, but it needs much more clicks than before to get
>> an overview of the messages, so I did assume that was already
>> discussed, but frankly I not even know which threads tho
s topic.
>>
>
> Sigh, yes, but it needs much more clicks than before to get
> an overview of the messages, so I did assume that was already
> discussed, but frankly I not even know which threads those were.
>
A different approach would be this:
what do we have to do to get
On 3/25/20 8:32 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On Wed, 25 Mar 2020 at 04:48, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I do not want to start a flame war.
>>
>> I just am curious what was the reason why
>> the old system cannot be used any more?
>
> The software it ran on hasn't been maintained for year
On Wed, 25 Mar 2020 at 04:48, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I do not want to start a flame war.
>
> I just am curious what was the reason why
> the old system cannot be used any more?
The software it ran on hasn't been maintained for years.
> Would there be a possibility to get the old look-a
Hi,
I do not want to start a flame war.
I just am curious what was the reason why
the old system cannot be used any more?
Would there be a possibility to get the old look-and-feel back?
Thanks
Bernd.
On Mon, 9 Mar 2020 at 10:28, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> 6) there used to be a Raw text URL to grab the raw email, now there is nothing
Based on info from #overseers ...
While you can't download the raw text of an individual email now, you
can get the entire month's mail in a compressed archive, from
On Mon, 9 Mar 2020 at 19:57, Thomas König wrote:
> As far as the advantages go: A per-thread view is nice, but I don't
> think having it outweighs the disadvantages above.
We always had a threaded view:
https://gcc.gnu.org/legacy-ml/gcc-bugs/2020-03/threads.html
It just wasn't the default:
https:/
On Mon, 9 Mar 2020, Jakub Jelinek via Overseers wrote:
> 5) emails used to be sanitized against harvesters, now they aren't
The pipermail munging feature was unusably bad (it messed up Texinfo diffs
very badly, including in the mbox version of the archive, e.g. "+@node" at
the start of a line w
Hi,
Some comments.
Generally, I found the old format to be very good for navigating, and I
would like to have the new one match the old one as closely as possible.
1) the by date monthly list of mails used to be ordered newest to oldest
mails first, now it is oldest to newest, so when dealing
On Mon, Mar 09, 2020 at 10:10:31AM -0400, Frank Ch. Eigler via Overseers wrote:
>Hi -
>
>> one more point: The gcc mailing list including this discussion is
>> currently not being archived, the last message is from 2020-03-06.
>
>Found & fixed a permission proble
Hi -
> one more point: The gcc mailing list including this discussion is
> currently not being archived, the last message is from 2020-03-06.
Found & fixed a permission problem with the mailmnan archives.
Let's see if this one makes it in now.
- FChE
Hi,
one more point: The gcc mailing list including this discussion is currently not
being archived, the last message is from 2020-03-06.
Hi,
I concur with what Jakub wrote. The new web interface is much less useful than
the old one; a severe regression for developers, so to speak.
I also seem to have missed all discussion on this change (if there was
anything). I do not understand why such a huge change was implemented that way,
On Mon, 9 Mar 2020 at 10:28, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> 1) the by date monthly list of mails used to be ordered newest to oldest
> mails first, now it is oldest to newest, so when dealing with new stuff one
> has to always scroll down
You can use #end to jump to the bottom.
> 6) there used to be a Ra
On Mon, Mar 09, 2020 at 10:46:31AM +0100, Tobias Burnus wrote:
> Hi Thomas, hi Overseers
>
> I can confirm that those are stripped off!
>
> I did sent an email with three attachments:
> * test.txt (text/plain)
> * test.diff (text/x-diff)
> * the company's disclaimer
>
> The attachment with 'text
On Mon, 9 Mar 2020 10:46:31 +0100, Tobias Burnus wrote:
> Hi Thomas, hi Overseers
>
> I can confirm that those are stripped off!
>
> I did sent an email with three attachments:
> * test.txt (text/plain)
> * test.diff (text/x-diff)
> * the company's disclaimer
It appears that since the migration
Hi Thomas, hi Overseers
I can confirm that those are stripped off!
I did sent an email with three attachments:
* test.txt (text/plain)
* test.diff (text/x-diff)
* the company's disclaimer
The attachment with 'text/x-diff' MIME was removed :-(
See: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/current/0
> CC overseers.
>
> they are not stripped – I do see them both in my inbox and at
> https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2020-March/054050.html
They were stripped for me :-( I even mailed Paul about the (for me) missing
attachment.
Not sure what is going on there, but whatever change was made
ffix: .bin) – which is very inconvenient.
Cheers,
Tobias
On 3/9/20 9:23 AM, Thomas König wrote:
Hi,
looks like the new mailing list setup is stripping off patches. Example:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2020-
March/054050.html
The attachments are also not distributed via mail.
This
Hi,
looks like the new mailing list setup is stripping off patches. Example:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2020-
March/054050.html
The attachments are also not distributed via mail.
This breaks the gfortran review process. Could somebody please fix this?
Regards
I am not sure if this is the correct mailing list but I did not see a
better one to use.
I have been trying to unsubscribe from some mailing lists and the process
does not seem to be working. As an example I sent an unsubscribe request
for libstdc++-digest, got a reply asking me to confirm, when
Hi,
a gentle reminder: Patches which touch gcc/fortran or libgfortran need
to be discussed on the fortran mailing list and approved by a reviewer.
There have been a couple of commits recently where this wasn't followed,
please remember to do so in the future.
Regards
Thomasa
On Mai 01 2017, Thomas Koenig wrote:
> is the gcc-prs mailing list active?
Not any more since GCC has started using bugzilla back in 2003.
Andreas.
--
Andreas Schwab, sch...@linux-m68k.org
GPG Key fingerprint = 58CA 54C7 6D53 942B 1756 01D3 44D5 214B 8276 4ED5
"And now for s
Hi,
is the gcc-prs mailing list active? The archives show no
bugs entered for example for https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-prs/2017-04/ .
Regards
Thomas
On Wed, 3 Feb 2016, Keith Lindsay wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/current/
> currently redirects to
> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2016-01/
> instead of
> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2016-02/
Thanks for the report, Keith. This appears fixed now.
I also verified this for a couple of other mailin
FYI,
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/current/
currently redirects to
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2016-01/
instead of
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2016-02/
Other GCC mailing lists also redirect to 2016-01, instead of 2016-02.
Keith
y trivial question.
Regards,
George...
From: George R Goffe
To: Jonathan Wakely
Cc: "gcc@gcc.gnu.org"
Sent: Thursday, October 2, 2014 9:32 AM
Subject: Re: Problems with the gcc-bugs mailing list.
Jonathan,
The problem I have is that my yahoo email
On 30 September 2014 01:08, George R Goffe wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm trying to get some help here.
>
> I have two problems
> with the mailing list software. #1) I have tried to get into digest mode
> by unsubscribing and re-subscribing to the list but that's not workin
Hi,
I'm trying to get some help here.
I have two problems
with the mailing list software. #1) I have tried to get into digest mode
by unsubscribing and re-subscribing to the list but that's not working.
#2) I'm trying to get some help from the
"owner" of the l
On Sun, 22 Dec 2013, Tae Wong wrote:
> It will be better if you have enabled the Launchpad account seotaewong40.
>
> This account has been suspended for renaming an answer title multiple times.
The GCC team has nothing to do with Launchpad.
> There's also an ordering error on the GCC maintainer
GMANE replaces "@" with " ", so that @#$* becomes " #$*".
The wiki.documentfoundation.org site is taking too late to load.
On Sun, Jan 5, 2014 at 9:10 PM, Christopher Faylor
wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 08:40:07PM +0900, Tae Wong wrote:
>>You want to send a mail to python-dev at python dot org.
>>
>>The spam still exists in gcc-bugs mailing list:
>>
>>There's no reason that
On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 08:40:07PM +0900, Tae Wong wrote:
>You want to send a mail to python-dev at python dot org.
>
>The spam still exists in gcc-bugs mailing list:
>http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/2013-08/msg00689.html
>http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/2013-08/msg00759.html
>htt
[mailto:gcc-ow...@gcc.gnu.org] On Behalf Of Tae Wong
Sent: Saturday, December 28, 2013 3:40 AM
To: gcc@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: Remove spam in GCC mailing list
You want to send a mail to python-dev at python dot org.
The spam still exists in gcc-bugs mailing list:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/2
You want to send a mail to python-dev at python dot org.
The spam still exists in gcc-bugs mailing list:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/2013-08/msg00689.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/2013-08/msg00759.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/2013-08/msg00776.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs
1 - 100 of 211 matches
Mail list logo
