Douglas Bollinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>On Mon, 2 Oct 2006 09:47:54 + (UTC)
>"Duncan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>> However, there's apparently a bug in gcc 3.4.x in regard to something pan
>> does, and it's now an older compiler, with most distributions having
>> already moved to g
walt wrote:
AFAICT there is no such thing as 'a gcc bug' without specifying which OS
and which gcc version and which patchset. It's enough to drive even a
sane developer to drink (not that I know any sane developers).
Keep your smart mouth to yourself and pass me the bourbon. >:)
__
On Mon, 2 Oct 2006 09:47:54 + (UTC)
"Duncan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> However, there's apparently a bug in gcc 3.4.x in regard to something pan
> does, and it's now an older compiler, with most distributions having
> already moved to gcc 4.x (Gentoo, which I use, is now stable on 4.1.1 on
