http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55935
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55935
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-11
10:03:09 UTC ---
Created attachment 29143
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=29143
gcc48-pr55935.patch
Or alternative patch that ensures in the FE
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44061
--- Comment #8 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-11
10:20:13 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Fri Jan 11 10:20:02 2013
New Revision: 195103
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=195103
Log:
2012-01-11
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55898
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Liu net147 at gmail dot com 2013-01-11 10:20:15
UTC ---
It works if I compile the test case with -fno-exceptions.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44061
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||4.8.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55937
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54300
--- Comment #6 from Eric Batut eric.batut at allegorithmic dot com 2013-01-11
10:42:04 UTC ---
The patch by Christophe Lyon in the linked email was applied on trunk by Ramana
at rev 188951 (June 25th 2012), but gcc-trunk still fails as of
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55672
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55936
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55936
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55939
Bug #: 55939
Summary: [4.6/4.7/4.8 regression] gcc miscompiles gmp-5.0.5 on
m68k-linux
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55939
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.6.4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55940
Bug #: 55940
Summary: Incorrect code for accessing parameters with 32-bit
Intel hosts
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.2
Status:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55940
--- Comment #1 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-11
11:23:02 UTC ---
Your assumptions are wrong according to documentation:
@item cdecl
@cindex functions that do pop the argument stack on the 386
@opindex mrtd
On
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55940
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55940
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55932
--- Comment #2 from stefan.mauerberger at gmail dot com 2013-01-11 11:50:19 UTC
---
Indeed, it is a F2003 feature. Does that matter?
I searched for duplicates without finding a similar one. Anyways ...
Thanks for the suggested
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53342
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-11
11:52:59 UTC ---
Created attachment 29144
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=29144
hackish attempt
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49213
--- Comment #11 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-11 12:04:26 UTC ---
Note: Neither of the patches in comment 8 and 10 shows any testsuite
regressions.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55934
--- Comment #2 from Steven Bosscher steven at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-11
12:49:16 UTC ---
This is trivially fixed with the following patch:
Index: lra-assigns.c
===
---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55934
Steven Bosscher steven at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55934
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-11
12:59:33 UTC ---
Please also consider asm goto like:
void bar (int);
void
foo (_Complex float x)
{
asm volatile goto ( : : x (x) : : foo); /* { dg-error
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55941
Bug #: 55941
Summary: [4.8 Regression] Strange copy of double (in struct) to
stack
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55931
Daniel Krügler daniel.kruegler at googlemail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55931
--- Comment #3 from Daniel Krügler daniel.kruegler at googlemail dot com
2013-01-11 13:26:46 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #1)
Most likely because Testint is not complete at the time of parsing.
But this should be considered as a compiler
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55935
--- Comment #9 from Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr 2013-01-11
13:35:30 UTC ---
Apparently Ada does not like the patch at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=29142
When applied on top of r195103 bootstrap (last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55936
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-11
13:36:29 UTC ---
Patch at http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-01/msg00592.html even though
it produces way more useful ranges regresses
FAIL:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55935
--- Comment #10 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-11
13:43:50 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #7)
Created attachment 29142 [details]
gcc48-pr55935.patch
Untested fix. Although the FE perhaps could
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=6
H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55935
--- Comment #11 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-11
14:05:14 UTC ---
Created attachment 29145
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=29145
alternative canonicalize_constructor_val fix
Should be less
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54195
Mikael Morin mikael at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mikael at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55889
Andrey Belevantsev abel at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54195
--- Comment #12 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-11 14:29:41 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #11)
(In reply to comment #10)
For comment #8, resolve_typebound_intrinsic_op is called twice: Once for the
base type 'nc', and once for
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55935
--- Comment #12 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-11
14:30:29 UTC ---
Index: gcc/tree-cfgcleanup.c
===
--- gcc/tree-cfgcleanup.c (revision 195103)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55889
--- Comment #7 from David Edelsohn dje at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-11 14:37:21
UTC ---
Created attachment 29147
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=29147
sched-verbose=6 dump output for failing testcase
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55931
Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55935
--- Comment #13 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-11
14:40:45 UTC ---
Created attachment 29148
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=29148
gimple-fold
Alternative to alternative
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55942
Bug #: 55942
Summary: [C++11] sorry, unimplemented: calling a member
function of the object being constructed in a constant
expression
Classification: Unclassified
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55941
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37722
Timo Kreuzer timo.kreuzer at reactos dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55935
--- Comment #14 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-11
14:53:20 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #13)
Created attachment 29148 [details]
gimple-fold
Alternative to alternative canonicalize_constructor_val fix which
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52381
--- Comment #5 from Timo Kreuzer timo.kreuzer at reactos dot org 2013-01-11
14:55:15 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #4)
Like __atomic_compare_exchange_n?
Oh, didn't know of this one, thanks.
But I'm sure there are other similar things
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55935
--- Comment #15 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-11
14:55:55 UTC ---
Index: tree-ssa-pre.c
===
--- tree-ssa-pre.c (revision 195103)
+++
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55941
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rth at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55608
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54392
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54392
--- Comment #17 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com 2013-01-11
16:01:28 UTC ---
In my opinion, this isn't really fixable in a generic and decently neat way in
the current implementation, that is in std::string. I still mean
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50199
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54392
--- Comment #18 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com 2013-01-11
16:03:23 UTC ---
PS: for 4.9, I think we essentially agree that we want to roll in anyway
__versa_string, break the ABI, etc. We also exchanged some ideas about
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55934
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-11
16:09:46 UTC ---
I should mention that Investigated this a little before and found the
instruction which was causing the ICE was not the inline-asm but a clobber of
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55719
--- Comment #8 from Andreas Krebbel krebbel at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-11
16:43:56 UTC ---
Author: krebbel
Date: Fri Jan 11 16:43:49 2013
New Revision: 195109
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=195109
Log:
2013-01-11
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55719
Andreas Krebbel krebbel at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55920
Martin Jambor jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jamborm
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55920
--- Comment #4 from Martin Jambor jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-11
16:55:54 UTC ---
The debug statements for non-DCEable variables can be easily disabled
by the following (also, yet untested) patch:
2013-01-11 Martin Jambor
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55920
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-11
17:04:45 UTC ---
I'd very much prefer to keep PR54971 fix in.
As for #c3, I believe it would be enough to test the mode, so perhaps
tree repl =
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55909
--- Comment #35 from philip.copeland at oracle dot com 2013-01-11 17:19:06 UTC
---
(Sorry for the delay in getting back to you)
I've multipass recompiled all the affected packages associated with gcc/glibc
over the last day which has taken
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55909
--- Comment #36 from philip.copeland at oracle dot com 2013-01-11 17:20:35 UTC
---
Created attachment 29149
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=29149
g++/gcc testsuite results
g++/gcc testsuite results
Component: middle-end
AssignedTo: unassig...@gcc.gnu.org
ReportedBy: sch...@linux-m68k.org
Target: ia64-*-*
Created attachment 29150
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=29150
Testcase
$ gcc-20130111/Build/gcc/xgcc -B gcc-20130111/Build/gcc/ -S
gcc/gcc/testsuite
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55792
--- Comment #33 from Jan Hubicka hubicka at ucw dot cz 2013-01-11 17:36:48
UTC ---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55792
--- Comment #32 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2013-01-10 19:36:08
UTC ---
(In reply
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55909
--- Comment #37 from Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-11
17:55:38 UTC ---
So tls DID exist and was being used. I think I can assume that tls support
didn't go away for sparc64 in later gcc releases. (I also threw the
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54139
--- Comment #2 from Aldy Hernandez aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-11
18:01:57 UTC ---
I have built a cross cc1/cc1plus with:
blah/configure --enable-languages=c,c++ --target=armv5tel-unknown-linux-gnueabi
but I get a totally
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55674
--- Comment #22 from Teresa Johnson tejohnson at google dot com 2013-01-11
18:18:48 UTC ---
Hi Honza,
I ran a number of experiments at different thresholds, and found that
performance starts dropping pretty quickly as the working set
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55944
Bug #: 55944
Summary: [C++11] static local member with constexpr c'tor
causes ICE
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55931
--- Comment #5 from Daniel Krügler daniel.kruegler at googlemail dot com
2013-01-11 18:32:13 UTC ---
The ICE bug of 4.8.0 has been submitted as bug 55944
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54392
--- Comment #19 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-11
18:58:53 UTC ---
Agreed. I don't think we'll ever fix this in the current std::string code TBH
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55945
Bug #: 55945
Summary: alloca aligns aligned pointers
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55488
Dmitry Vyukov dvyukov at google dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dvyukov
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55946
Bug #: 55946
Summary: Wrong GNAT tools used on build of gnattools
[native-cross]
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55939
--- Comment #1 from Mikael Pettersson mikpe at it dot uu.se 2013-01-11
20:06:03 UTC ---
I cut out one line too many in the build log, it's tests/mpq/t-get_d that
fails.
On the surface the problem started with Jan Hubicka's Inline
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55947
Bug #: 55947
Summary: non constant memory models lose HLE qualifiers
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55948
Bug #: 55948
Summary: __atomic_clear / __atomic_store_n ignore HLE_RELEASE
flags
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55949
Bug #: 55949
Summary: __builtin_object_size size passed to memcpy_chk is
incorrect
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.4
Status:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55947
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at
20130111 (prerelease) [gcc-4_6-branch revision 195115] (GCC)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55947
--- Comment #2 from Andi Kleen andi-gcc at firstfloor dot org 2013-01-11
22:01:49 UTC ---
I would probably add at least a warning. The whole concept of a runtime
switched memory barrier is imho ill-defined.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55950
Bug #: 55950
Summary: Invalid sqrt constant propagation with -frounding-mode
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55949
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55951
Bug #: 55951
Summary: ICE in check_array_designated_initializer, at
cp/decl.c:4785
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55952
Bug #: 55952
Summary: x86 FPU, unnecessary fxch instruction
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55693
torvald at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||torvald at gcc dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55953
Bug #: 55953
Summary: hand loop faster then builtin memset
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55953
Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55890
--- Comment #8 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-11 23:39:30 UTC ---
Author: vries
Date: Fri Jan 11 23:39:18 2013
New Revision: 195119
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=195119
Log:
2013-01-12 Tom de Vries
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55953
--- Comment #2 from Evgeniy Dushistov dushistov at mail dot ru 2013-01-12
00:05:15 UTC ---
Actually it is not only CPU 64bit related issue, for example the same CPU (i7),
32 bit mode:
variant one:
push %ebp
vmovdqa 0x80488e0,%ymm0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55953
--- Comment #3 from Evgeniy Dushistov dushistov at mail dot ru 2013-01-12
00:13:09 UTC ---
Cross compiling for arm, g++ have almost the same version:
arm-angstrom-linux-gnueabi-g++ (Linaro GCC 4.7-2012.10) 4.7.3 20121001:
variant one
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55949
--- Comment #3 from Ryan Mansfield rmansfield at qnx dot com 2013-01-12
01:03:03 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
Looks like a bug in whatever string.h headers you are using.
The second parameter for __builtin_object_size for memcpy
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55949
Ryan Mansfield rmansfield at qnx dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55921
John David Anglin danglin at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55953
H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hjl.tools at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55693
--- Comment #8 from Jack Howarth howarth at nitro dot med.uc.edu 2013-01-12
03:24:55 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #7)
The gdb trace looks alright to me. My guess is that this is a bug in the
uninstrumented code path, not in libitm.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55954
Bug #: 55954
Summary: Bugzilla breaks mail threading
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55954
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-12
04:59:12 UTC ---
I think it is really a bug in the mail clients if they don't just use
In-Reply-To instead.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55954
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-12
05:06:43 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #1)
I think it is really a bug in the mail clients if they don't just use
In-Reply-To instead.
The reason why I say that is
93 matches
Mail list logo
