Joe Buck wrote:
> It is PR 25892.
Thanks,
--
Mark Mitchell
CodeSourcery
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(650) 331-3385 x713
On Thu, Jan 19, 2006 at 06:44:28PM -0800, Mark Mitchell wrote:
> Joe Buck wrote:
>
> > So the answer is that, after consulting with some of the affected people
> > (which is why you got mail, Mike) the SC told RMS that it would be
> > changed. If it hasn't been done yet, then it's a release block
Joe Buck wrote:
> So the answer is that, after consulting with some of the affected people
> (which is why you got mail, Mike) the SC told RMS that it would be
> changed. If it hasn't been done yet, then it's a release blocker,
> because it was a promise the SC made.
Since you seem to have a han
On Wed, Jan 18, 2006 at 01:10:19AM -0800, Mike Stump wrote:
> On Jan 17, 2006, at 1:19 PM, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> >Someone's informed Richard Stallman that this (annoying) warning
> >will not be
> >enabled by default in GCC 4.1.
>
> >But, it currently seems to be. Should it be turned off be
On Jan 17, 2006, at 1:19 PM, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
Someone's informed Richard Stallman that this (annoying) warning
will not be
enabled by default in GCC 4.1.
But, it currently seems to be. Should it be turned off before the
release?
The SC or Jim Wilson will know more than I.
If
