--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-09
19:32 ---
*** Bug 20919 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From pcarlini at suse dot de 2005-01-16 10:02
---
Fixed.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Res
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-01-16
09:59 ---
Subject: Bug 19322
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-01-16 09:59:07
Modified files:
libstdc++-v3 : ChangeLog
libstdc++-v3/inclu
--- Additional Comments From gdr at integrable-solutions dot net
2005-01-14 03:18 ---
Subject: Re: std::isnan<>() is broken on FreeBSD
"pcarlini at suse dot de" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| Eric Botcazou reported privately that the patch doesn't introduce regressions
| on SPARC/Solar
--- Additional Comments From pcarlini at suse dot de 2005-01-14 01:05
---
Eric Botcazou reported privately that the patch doesn't introduce regressions
on SPARC/Solaris 2.5.1, 2.6, 7, 8 and 9, both mainline and 3.4. Thanks Eric!
As soon as we have FreeBSD results, we can go ahead...
--
--- Additional Comments From pcarlini at suse dot de 2005-01-13 18:27
---
> Ok, I'll try to regtest the patch later today on FreeBSD (I'll have to
> RTFM first on how exactly this is done). I'll report back.
Thanks. If it's the first time, probably you have to install DejaGnu and Expect
--- Additional Comments From lminder at gmx dot net 2005-01-13 18:22
---
Subject: Re: std::isnan<>() is broken on FreeBSD
gdr at integrable-solutions dot net wrote:
> I think the patch is OK -- modulo testing on different targets,
> especially
> *BSD, linux and another non-glibc system
--
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |pcarlini at suse dot de
|dot org |
Status|NEW
--- Additional Comments From gdr at integrable-solutions dot net
2005-01-13 13:27 ---
Subject: Re: std::isnan<>() is broken on FreeBSD
"pcarlini at suse dot de" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| Gaby, can you spot something fundamentally wrong in the proposed patch? I'm
| testing the slig
--- Additional Comments From pcarlini at suse dot de 2005-01-13 10:41
---
Gaby, can you spot something fundamentally wrong in the proposed patch? I'm
testing the slightly tweaked attached version on x86-linux and everything seems
still ok: I would suggest Lorenz regtesting it on freebsd
--
What|Removed |Added
CC||gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19322
11 matches
Mail list logo