--- Comment #15 from jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-07-04 15:16 ---
Closing 4.1 branch. The log suggests this was only ever a problem on the
branch, not trunk; if it's actually present with more recent versions, please
reopen and mark accordingly.
--
jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.1.2 |4.1.3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25815
--- Comment #14 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-25 02:36
---
Will not be fixed in 4.1.1; adjust target milestone to 4.1.2.
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #13 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-04-16 18:37
---
Until/unless this is shown to be a problem on a primary/secondary platform, I'm
going to downgrade it to P5.
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #11 from hp at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-08 18:35 ---
Uh, make no mistake, this *is* a regression; see the original description.
There's a revision before which this test worked and a revision after
which it does not work. This happened in 4.1 era, so it's a 4.1
--- Comment #12 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2006-03-08 18:45 ---
(In reply to comment #11)
I changed the PR component to a historically more probable one, to avoid
blaming libstdc++, as it seems that's an conclusion you're trying to avoid.
Agreed, *as a miscompilation*, can be a
