[Bug web/64968] Upgrade GCC Bugzilla to 5.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64968 --- Comment #49 from Frédéric Buclin --- (In reply to Markus Trippelsdorf from comment #47) > Another cosmetic issue that I've noticed is that an extra newline is added > after every quoted comment. This problem has been reported upstream, see https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1208732 (In reply to Markus Trippelsdorf from comment #48) > Another issue. Searching all issues for "-fno-ipa-icf" returns "Zarro Boogs > found.". The Simple Search page uses the MySQL fulltext search feature. Words much match some criteria to be found and returned, see https://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.5/en/fulltext-boolean.html. If you want to avoid these limitations, use one of the following two solutions: 1) Use the Advanced Search page: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/query.cgi?longdesc=-fno-ipa-icf_type=substring_format=advanced=DUPLICATE 2) Type: DUPL comment:"-fno-ipa-icf" in the QuickSearch box at the top/bottom of pages. Note that I added DUPL (duplicate bugs only) in the query to limit the number of bugs returned. Without it, it seems that MySQL is too slow to return data before Apache times out.
[Bug web/64968] Upgrade GCC Bugzilla to 5.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64968 --- Comment #48 from Markus Trippelsdorf --- (In reply to Markus Trippelsdorf from comment #47) > Another cosmetic issue that I've noticed is that an extra newline is added > after every quoted comment. > > For example: > > > test > reply The extra line is fine if there is no extra line already. > test1 reply (extra line introduced by bugzilla) > test2 reply2 (two extra lines, one introduced by bugzilla, one by the author.) Another issue. Searching all issues for "-fno-ipa-icf" returns "Zarro Boogs found.". But of course there are plenty of PRs that include this string, e.g.: PR67659. https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/buglist.cgi?bug_status=__all__=%22-fno-ipa-icf%22_id=126886=Importance_format=specific
[Bug web/64968] Upgrade GCC Bugzilla to 5.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64968 --- Comment #47 from Markus Trippelsdorf trippels at gcc dot gnu.org --- Another cosmetic issue that I've noticed is that an extra newline is added after every quoted comment. For example: test reply
[Bug web/64968] Upgrade GCC Bugzilla to 5.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64968 --- Comment #44 from Markus Trippelsdorf trippels at gcc dot gnu.org --- Any update on the timestamp issue? It still happens regularly.
[Bug web/64968] Upgrade GCC Bugzilla to 5.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64968 --- Comment #45 from Frédéric Buclin LpSolit at netscape dot net --- (In reply to Markus Trippelsdorf from comment #44) Any update on the timestamp issue? It still happens regularly. I reported to overseers that the problem was not in Bugzilla, per comment 34, but I don't know if they found what was altering the local timezone. I can add a workaround in Bugzilla itself, if that helps. Frank?
[Bug web/64968] Upgrade GCC Bugzilla to 5.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64968 --- Comment #46 from Frank Ch. Eigler fche at redhat dot com --- I can add a workaround in Bugzilla itself, if that helps. Frank? Please go ahead.
[Bug web/64968] Upgrade GCC Bugzilla to 5.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64968 --- Comment #41 from Uroš Bizjak ubizjak at gmail dot com --- The GCC bugzilla favicon now shows generic Bugzilla favicon. Previously, it was a GCC favicon.
[Bug web/64968] Upgrade GCC Bugzilla to 5.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64968 Frédéric Buclin LpSolit at netscape dot net changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #35409|0 |1 is obsolete|| --- Comment #43 from Frédéric Buclin LpSolit at netscape dot net --- Created attachment 35548 -- https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35548action=edit GCC patch for 5.0, v4 With GCC favicon.
[Bug web/64968] Upgrade GCC Bugzilla to 5.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64968 --- Comment #42 from Frédéric Buclin LpSolit at netscape dot net --- (In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #41) The GCC bugzilla favicon now shows generic Bugzilla favicon. Previously, it was a GCC favicon. Fixed
[Bug web/64968] Upgrade GCC Bugzilla to 5.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64968 --- Comment #36 from Andreas Schwab sch...@linux-m68k.org --- mpolacek isn't a valid bugzilla user by itself. You always need to type the whole email, or wait for the completion to appear and select it.
[Bug web/64968] Upgrade GCC Bugzilla to 5.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64968 --- Comment #37 from Markus Trippelsdorf trippels at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to Andreas Schwab from comment #36) mpolacek isn't a valid bugzilla user by itself. You always need to type the whole email, or wait for the completion to appear and select it. Yes when I wait for the completion to appear it works. But in the previous version of bugzilla I could type mpolacek and hit Save Changes immediately (before the autocompletion kicked in). Then on the next page it would show the list of hits. Select the one you want (in the case of mpolacek there is only one hit) and hit Continue. This doesn't work anymore.
[Bug web/64968] Upgrade GCC Bugzilla to 5.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64968 --- Comment #35 from Markus Trippelsdorf trippels at gcc dot gnu.org --- CCing people doesn't work anymore. For example on https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66066 when I click edit in the CC List, and add mpolacek and then hit save changes immediately. On the next page it shows: CC: mpolacek matched Marek Polacek mpola...@gcc.gnu.org Then I hit enter. And the name is not entered in CC.
[Bug web/64968] Upgrade GCC Bugzilla to 5.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64968 --- Comment #38 from Frédéric Buclin LpSolit at netscape dot net --- I can confirm the regression. I reported this issue upstream: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1162914 Thanks Markus for catching that! :)
[Bug web/64968] Upgrade GCC Bugzilla to 5.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64968 --- Comment #39 from Frédéric Buclin LpSolit at netscape dot net --- Bug fixed upstream, and here. :)
[Bug web/64968] Upgrade GCC Bugzilla to 5.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64968 --- Comment #40 from Markus Trippelsdorf trippels at gcc dot gnu.org --- Thanks for the quick fix.
[Bug web/64968] Upgrade GCC Bugzilla to 5.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64968
--- Comment #34 from Frédéric Buclin LpSolit at netscape dot net ---
My debug code caught the problem. In one of the last bugmails, I got:
Date: Sun, 03 May 2015 14:56:33 +
X-Bugzilla-Debug-Date: Sun, 03 May 2015 14:56:33 +
X-Bugzilla-Debug-DeltaTS: 2015-05-03 20:26:33
X-Bugzilla-Debug-Local_Timezone: Asia/Kolkata
X-Bugzilla-TZ-FromEnv: Asia/Kolkata
X-Bugzilla-TZ-FromEtcTimezone: no data
X-Bugzilla-TZ-FromEtcLocaltime: UTC
X-Bugzilla-TZ-FromEtcTIMEZONE: no data
X-Bugzilla-TZ-FromEtcSysconfigClock: UTC
X-Bugzilla-TZ-FromEtcDefaultInit: no data
DeltaTS contains the date stored in the DB; this one is correct. But
while 98% of bugmails have X-Bugzilla-TZ-FromEnv: no data, this one
has Asia/Kolkata. This header is populated by $ENV{TZ}. As it takes
precedence over FromEtcLocaltime: UTC, this explains why the timestamp
is wrong.
Now, I cannot explain why $ENV{TZ} = Asia/Kolkata from time to time.
But at least, we know where to look at.
[Bug web/64968] Upgrade GCC Bugzilla to 5.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64968 --- Comment #32 from Frédéric Buclin LpSolit at netscape dot net --- For some reason, DateTime::TimeZone-new(name = 'local') sometimes returns Asia/Kolkata, which explains the -05:30 offset observed in the famous 2% of bugmails with an incorrect timestamp. I added extra debug code to track which TZ method is the culprit.
[Bug web/64968] Upgrade GCC Bugzilla to 5.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64968 --- Comment #33 from Frédéric Buclin LpSolit at netscape dot net --- I found only one user account which uses the Asia/Kolkata timezone. But no reason why this would interact with the local timezone.
[Bug web/64968] Upgrade GCC Bugzilla to 5.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64968 --- Comment #30 from Frédéric Buclin LpSolit at netscape dot net --- (I added some debug code to Bugzilla to try to understand what's wrong. Just ignore this email.)
[Bug web/64968] Upgrade GCC Bugzilla to 5.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64968 --- Comment #31 from Frédéric Buclin LpSolit at netscape dot net --- (ignore this one as well)
[Bug web/64968] Upgrade GCC Bugzilla to 5.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64968 --- Comment #27 from Markus Trippelsdorf trippels at gcc dot gnu.org --- Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: rai...@emrich-ebersheim.de gcc-bugzi...@gcc.gnu.org Newsgroups: gmane.comp.gcc.bugs Subject: [Bug lto/65559] [5/6 Regression] lto1.exe: internal compiler error: in read_cgraph_and_symbols, at lto/lto.c:2947 Date: Thu, 30 Apr 2015 08:15:19 + Lines: 5 Approved: n...@gmane.org Message-ID: bug-65559-4-j1ukby4...@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ References: bug-6555...@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1430401548 13250 80.91.229.3 (30 Apr 2015 13:45:48 GMT) X-Complaints-To: use...@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 30 Apr 2015 13:45:48 + (UTC) To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Original-X-From: gcc-bugs-return-485090-gcgb-bugs-2=m.gmane@gcc.gnu.org Thu Apr 30 15:45:36 2015 Return-path: gcc-bugs-return-485090-gcgb-bugs-2=m.gmane@gcc.gnu.org Envelope-to: gcgb-bug...@plane.gmane.org Original-Received: from server1.sourceware.org ([209.132.180.131] helo=sourceware.org) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from gcc-bugs-return-485090-gcgb-bugs-2=m.gmane@gcc.gnu.org) id 1YnomS-0003mR-Bh for gcgb-bug...@plane.gmane.org; Thu, 30 Apr 2015 15:45:32 +0200 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gcc.gnu.org; h=list-id :list-unsubscribe:list-archive:list-post:list-help:sender:from :to:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to:references:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; q=dns; s=default; b=nwh sN0PU7kTVYuR/f2t2lwRUUHnk7oxYgHMabZP3BkhDNkgbp57w4v8ushqSu24R/zO /oyUAJ6bDzcydlZJXNSf07CpMFrSZx+Y+HERUHtgrvtag9JOnBnMEIL6fmjLBpcX hB7WrLxwQxpyVIeq3jI9X/0CRms5sy3U2+YapPfA= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org; h=list-id :list-unsubscribe:list-archive:list-post:list-help:sender:from :to:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to:references:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; s=default; bh=IQ0EMBz10 AKx1Kp1vnG6OLkLCuk=; b=S1iT7TV03c/1TA7o1PCMMX4pfYprYla5bfJ1hPPH7 IWH3c57//j9D7bKEaJzvl9CcYcosCkFoR+sRsOKdxq1+KjQSSOpIEefIcosn1cen WAqelyk+laOX72lRNHpr1i3CP7g9bgpCU9dlBJsJJ8QJEo89jWqjfBVOYPZwAUI4 5w= Original-Received: (qmail 103939 invoked by alias); 30 Apr 2015 13:45:24 - Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-h...@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org List-Unsubscribe: mailto:gcc-bugs-unsubscribe-gcgb-bugs-2=m.gmane@gcc.gnu.org List-Archive: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/ List-Post: mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org List-Help: mailto:gcc-bugs-h...@gcc.gnu.org Original-Sender: gcc-bugs-ow...@gcc.gnu.org Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Original-Received: (qmail 103859 invoked by uid 48); 30 Apr 2015 13:45:21 - X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: lto
[Bug web/64968] Upgrade GCC Bugzilla to 5.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64968 --- Comment #28 from Frédéric Buclin LpSolit at netscape dot net --- Maybe is this a coincidence, but all bugmails I found which have a wrong timestamp have something in common. First of all, the offset is *always* the same: -05:30. Then, it seems the problem only happens when the clock is close to :15, :30, :45 or :00, as shown below: Markus Trippelsdorf 2015-04-28 16:14:58 UTC H.J. Lu 2015-04-28 16:19:15 UTC Andreas Schwab 2015-04-28 20:20:10 UTC Christian Eggers2015-04-29 15:59:49 UTC Jonathan Wakely 2015-04-30 09:14:14 UTC Rainer Emrich 2015-04-30 13:45:19 UTC @Markus: no need to paste the full email header anymore as I'm getting all bugmails myself since last night. Just indicate the bug ID and comment ID (or real timestamp if it's not a new comment), and I will find it. :) @overseers: to be honest, I don't think this is a bug in Bugzilla itself. I would tend to a bug or a bad interaction with the MTA, qmail or sendmail. Is sourceware running some cron job every 15 minutes, which could interact with Bugzilla sending emails at the same time? And depending on which job is run, maybe sendmail/qmail is confused and uses the wrong timezone. No idea why the offset is always -05:30, but this may give sourceware admins some clue.
[Bug web/64968] Upgrade GCC Bugzilla to 5.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64968 --- Comment #29 from Frédéric Buclin LpSolit at netscape dot net --- One more, at :45: Matt Breedlove 2015-04-30 20:45:32 UTC I now have no doubt that this is not a coincidence.
[Bug web/64968] Upgrade GCC Bugzilla to 5.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64968 --- Comment #25 from Frédéric Buclin LpSolit at netscape dot net --- Did this problem disappear? Or are there still some bugmails today with a wrong timestamp?
[Bug web/64968] Upgrade GCC Bugzilla to 5.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64968 --- Comment #26 from Markus Trippelsdorf trippels at gcc dot gnu.org --- Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: christian.eggers at kathrein dot de gcc-bugzi...@gcc.gnu.org Newsgroups: gmane.comp.gcc.bugs Subject: [Bug target/65932] New: [5.1 Regression] Linux-3.10.75 on arm926ej-s does not boot due to wrong code generation Date: Wed, 29 Apr 2015 10:29:49 + Lines: 113 Approved: n...@gmane.org Message-ID: bug-6593...@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1430323200 7510 80.91.229.3 (29 Apr 2015 16:00:00 GMT) X-Complaints-To: use...@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 29 Apr 2015 16:00:00 + (UTC) To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Original-X-From: gcc-bugs-return-484992-gcgb-bugs-2=m.gmane@gcc.gnu.org Wed Apr 29 17:59:59 2015 Return-path: gcc-bugs-return-484992-gcgb-bugs-2=m.gmane@gcc.gnu.org Envelope-to: gcgb-bug...@plane.gmane.org Original-Received: from server1.sourceware.org ([209.132.180.131] helo=sourceware.org) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from gcc-bugs-return-484992-gcgb-bugs-2=m.gmane@gcc.gnu.org) id 1YnUOz-0001Mr-Sk for gcgb-bug...@plane.gmane.org; Wed, 29 Apr 2015 17:59:58 +0200 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gcc.gnu.org; h=list-id :list-unsubscribe:list-archive:list-post:list-help:sender:from :to:subject:date:message-id:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; q=dns; s=default; b=wF4 XpCycQCKvZYEpgslmjeE/iyiMnzvS1lDuekTkvBsh11w0fFLtrheGihbsGd4KOB9 ivtOHv6qMqlEQFpYWzluqxl6rLzXuUCD+WQFy4JkOijERIaAslqvycmQ+a3zAZKZ 1y/iA4Y0U5IceFqB9oakq8ZhmuhC7yETPRNmgnfI= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org; h=list-id :list-unsubscribe:list-archive:list-post:list-help:sender:from :to:subject:date:message-id:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; s=default; bh=MPQLMLxNK n5OEvc8DOdegu6zUbA=; b=lvJgWyPE2h0vlF+zFQdx9kxE+20elsY465TPyxTUv f6bSgFWl9zYehzSjTv8mhRd0ogv7ZD2Nuiyyf1wb3gWdeVd8aWJ4fCWuTLRejMA6 XTLhIodTKUNUl5S/0Q8Mdvduu6v2+tZyDSoBFX7ZCDjtR8K3JrhqR8okTbijha6u mg= Original-Received: (qmail 114156 invoked by alias); 29 Apr 2015 15:59:55 - Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-h...@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org List-Unsubscribe: mailto:gcc-bugs-unsubscribe-gcgb-bugs-2=m.gmane@gcc.gnu.org List-Archive: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/ List-Post: mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org List-Help: mailto:gcc-bugs-h...@gcc.gnu.org Original-Sender: gcc-bugs-ow...@gcc.gnu.org Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Original-Received: (qmail 114125 invoked by uid 48); 29 Apr 2015 15:59:51 - X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: new X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: target X-Bugzilla-Version: 5.1.1 X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
[Bug web/64968] Upgrade GCC Bugzilla to 5.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64968 --- Comment #19 from Markus Trippelsdorf trippels at gcc dot gnu.org --- See for example: http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnu.binutils.bugs/19841/focus=19855 When this thread is displayed in mutt the highlighted messages appears in the wrong place.
[Bug web/64968] Upgrade GCC Bugzilla to 5.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64968 --- Comment #18 from Markus Trippelsdorf trippels at gcc dot gnu.org --- One thing I've noticed is that the emails to gcc-bugs now use the local time of the user. So the sorting isn't correct anymore if people from different time zones comment. (The same issue also happens on sourceware.org/bugzilla/)
[Bug web/64968] Upgrade GCC Bugzilla to 5.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64968 --- Comment #20 from Andreas Schwab sch...@linux-m68k.org --- I don't think this has anything to do with the timezone of the commenter. For example the mail for comment #19 has the date Tue, 28 Apr 2015 16:28:19 + (which is correct), but comment #18 was sent with the date Tue, 28 Apr 2015 10:44:58 + (which is 5:30(!) hours off). Both mails were sent immediately after the comment was entered, and I assume that both were entered from the same local timezone.
[Bug web/64968] Upgrade GCC Bugzilla to 5.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64968 --- Comment #22 from Markus Trippelsdorf trippels at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to Frédéric Buclin from comment #21) Markus, did you change your timezone preference between comments 18 and 19? If yes, which ones did you select? No. But the question makes no sense, because we're talking about mails that bugzilla automatically sends to the bug mailing lists on every new comment. And I have no control over these.
[Bug web/64968] Upgrade GCC Bugzilla to 5.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64968 --- Comment #23 from Frédéric Buclin LpSolit at netscape dot net --- (In reply to Markus Trippelsdorf from comment #22) No. But the question makes no sense, because we're talking about mails that bugzilla automatically sends to the bug mailing lists on every new comment. And I have no control over these. The question makes total sense as I wanted to excluse a possible interaction between your timezone and the timezone used by Bugzilla to send bugmails. :)
[Bug web/64968] Upgrade GCC Bugzilla to 5.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64968 --- Comment #21 from Frédéric Buclin LpSolit at netscape dot net --- Markus, did you change your timezone preference between comments 18 and 19? If yes, which ones did you select?
[Bug web/64968] Upgrade GCC Bugzilla to 5.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64968 --- Comment #24 from Markus Trippelsdorf trippels at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to Frédéric Buclin from comment #23) (In reply to Markus Trippelsdorf from comment #22) No. But the question makes no sense, because we're talking about mails that bugzilla automatically sends to the bug mailing lists on every new comment. And I have no control over these. The question makes total sense as I wanted to excluse a possible interaction between your timezone and the timezone used by Bugzilla to send bugmails. :) Yeah, sorry. I though you were talking about the Sourceware binutils thread... Here are the headers of comment18 as seen by Gmane: Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: trippels at gcc dot gnu.org gcc-bugzi...@gcc.gnu.org Newsgroups: gmane.comp.gcc.bugs Subject: [Bug web/6496Here are the headers from comment 18 as seem by gmane: 8] Upgrade GCC Bugzilla to 5.0 Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2015 10:44:58 + Lines: 8 Approved: n...@gmane.org Message-ID: bug-64968-4-ldazd6q...@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ References: bug-6496...@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1430237721 11722 80.91.229.3 (28 Apr 2015 16:15:21 GMT) X-Complaints-To: use...@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2015 16:15:21 + (UTC) To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Original-X-From: gcc-bugs-return-484874-gcgb-bugs-2=m.gmane@gcc.gnu.org Tue Apr 28 18:15:06 2015 Return-path: gcc-bugs-return-484874-gcgb-bugs-2=m.gmane@gcc.gnu.org Envelope-to: gcgb-bug...@plane.gmane.org Original-Received: from server1.sourceware.org ([209.132.180.131] helo=sourceware.org) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from gcc-bugs-return-484874-gcgb-bugs-2=m.gmane@gcc.gnu.org) id 1Yn8A5-7b-65 for gcgb-bug...@plane.gmane.org; Tue, 28 Apr 2015 18:15:05 +0200 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gcc.gnu.org; h=list-id :list-unsubscribe:list-archive:list-post:list-help:sender:from :to:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to:references:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; q=dns; s=default; b=eu7 6Jpj++BEoByfYK1WkSgKWYsgqRvq1b0M/KeNitV7ycQgl4ohrGf06aE1Y/832wKH y/NHq6WvFLytj6vGFKekJhnAeux6xZObH0Enc4lmiW47TFMB7WFG/bhBbk40mNFH jz4WVwxa05bFqSFaPPVrl7Ym8EqWwrBYwxOOEPzM= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org; h=list-id :list-unsubscribe:list-archive:list-post:list-help:sender:from :to:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to:references:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; s=default; bh=zsFudk2X+ ANEPRr/cJWaH3SAEF8=; b=jastBc1aGdhM4s2RoZnruY7ZX/FcmBeRB0JEflRMT 68TkmxuDrRvnETjdLSGVZ28Kf18TbSc4ZdK4AYzsQFM5GBTHoRDeehXarAzcwHLq S1VHzdFA3sOjoz89NpDigZ2MYsn0aX3cj9Y4e783mPOPSRRSqsac1nV1hx7khXPE 4A= Original-Received: (qmail 122022 invoked by alias); 28 Apr 2015 16:15:03 - Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-h...@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org List-Unsubscribe: mailto:gcc-bugs-unsubscribe-gcgb-bugs-2=m.gmane@gcc.gnu.org List-Archive: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/ List-Post: mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org List-Help: mailto:gcc-bugs-h...@gcc.gnu.org Original-Sender:
[Bug web/64968] Upgrade GCC Bugzilla to 5.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64968 Frédéric Buclin LpSolit at netscape dot net changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #35353|0 |1 is obsolete|| --- Comment #16 from Frédéric Buclin LpSolit at netscape dot net --- Created attachment 35409 -- https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35409action=edit GCC patch for 5.0, v3 To make Mikael happy, I'm going to apply this patch which will sniff the content type of the submitted attachment and will convert it to text/plain if it's of type text/x-*.
[Bug web/64968] Upgrade GCC Bugzilla to 5.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64968 --- Comment #17 from Frédéric Buclin LpSolit at netscape dot net --- Patch applied. Mikael, the next time you upload a f90 script, Bugzilla will correctly detect it as text/plain. Note that it won't convert the MIME type of already uploaded attachments (which you can manually fix to text/plain yourself).
[Bug web/64968] Upgrade GCC Bugzilla to 5.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64968 Mikael Morin mikael at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mikael at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #12 from Mikael Morin mikael at gcc dot gnu.org --- Hello, not sure this is due to the upgrade, but the attachment appears empty in the page: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35405action=edit
[Bug web/64968] Upgrade GCC Bugzilla to 5.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64968 --- Comment #13 from Frank Ch. Eigler fche at redhat dot com --- (In reply to Mikael Morin from comment #12) Hello, not sure this is due to the upgrade, but the attachment appears empty in the page: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35405action=edit This appears to be due to CSS/JS goo marking that attachment textarea as display: none !important for some reason.
[Bug web/64968] Upgrade GCC Bugzilla to 5.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64968 --- Comment #15 from Mikael Morin mikael at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to Frédéric Buclin from comment #14) That's unrelated to the upgrade. Your web browser is unable to display files of type text/x-fortran, that's why. What you want is https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=622455 Ah OK. Thanks.
[Bug web/64968] Upgrade GCC Bugzilla to 5.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64968 --- Comment #14 from Frédéric Buclin LpSolit at netscape dot net --- (In reply to Mikael Morin from comment #12) Hello, not sure this is due to the upgrade, but the attachment appears empty in the page: That's unrelated to the upgrade. Your web browser is unable to display files of type text/x-fortran, that's why. What you want is https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=622455 (In reply to Frank Ch. Eigler from comment #13) This appears to be due to CSS/JS goo marking that attachment textarea as display: none !important for some reason. The reason being that you are looking at the edit comment field. So this behavior is correct.
[Bug web/64968] Upgrade GCC Bugzilla to 5.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64968 Frédéric Buclin LpSolit at netscape dot net changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #11 from Frédéric Buclin LpSolit at netscape dot net --- Upgrade done. :)
[Bug web/64968] Upgrade GCC Bugzilla to 5.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64968 Frédéric Buclin LpSolit at netscape dot net changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #35354|0 |1 is obsolete|| --- Comment #10 from Frédéric Buclin LpSolit at netscape dot net --- Created attachment 35397 -- https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35397action=edit GCC extension for 5.0, v2.0.1 This updated extension includes a RESTRICT_LOGIN boolean constant to easily enable/disable user account creation restrictions.
[Bug web/64968] Upgrade GCC Bugzilla to 5.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64968 --- Comment #9 from Frédéric Buclin LpSolit at netscape dot net --- Created attachment 35354 -- https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35354action=edit GCC extension for 5.0, v2 And the corresponding new extension.
[Bug web/64968] Upgrade GCC Bugzilla to 5.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64968 Frédéric Buclin LpSolit at netscape dot net changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #34735|0 |1 is obsolete|| --- Comment #8 from Frédéric Buclin LpSolit at netscape dot net --- Created attachment 35353 -- https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35353action=edit GCC patch for 5.0, v2 One of our customisations has been ported upstream (the hook to check new user accounts). One less thing to maintain ourselves.
[Bug web/64968] Upgrade GCC Bugzilla to 5.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64968 --- Comment #5 from Frank Ch. Eigler fche at redhat dot com --- The current .git repos are there as a backup. I'll move them out of the way.
[Bug web/64968] Upgrade GCC Bugzilla to 5.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64968 --- Comment #4 from Frédéric Buclin LpSolit at netscape dot net --- Bugzilla 5.0 is not available from bzr, it requires git. But there is already a .git repository in the root bugzilla/ directory, which requires root permissions to be read. What is git used for currently?
[Bug web/64968] Upgrade GCC Bugzilla to 5.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64968 --- Comment #7 from Frédéric Buclin LpSolit at netscape dot net --- Created attachment 34736 -- https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=34736action=edit GCC extension for 5.0, v1 This is exactly the same GCC extension as for 4.4.5. So far, it seems to work fine (on my local test installation).
[Bug web/64968] Upgrade GCC Bugzilla to 5.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64968 --- Comment #6 from Frédéric Buclin LpSolit at netscape dot net --- Created attachment 34735 -- https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=34735action=edit GCC patch for 5.0, v1 No code changes compared to 4.4, but the patch for 4.4 didn't apply cleanly to 5.0 due to some context changes. So I rediffed it again, now using git.
[Bug web/64968] Upgrade GCC Bugzilla to 5.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64968 Frédéric Buclin LpSolit at netscape dot net changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed||2015-02-09 CC||fche at redhat dot com Ever confirmed|0 |1 --- Comment #2 from Frédéric Buclin LpSolit at netscape dot net --- (In reply to Markus Trippelsdorf from comment #1) Would it be possible to lift the restriction on account creation after the update? This decision doesn't belong to me. CC'ing Frank.
[Bug web/64968] Upgrade GCC Bugzilla to 5.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64968 --- Comment #3 from Frank Ch. Eigler fche at redhat dot com --- If the spammer problem is brought under better control with bz5, sure.
[Bug web/64968] Upgrade GCC Bugzilla to 5.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64968 Markus Trippelsdorf trippels at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||trippels at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #1 from Markus Trippelsdorf trippels at gcc dot gnu.org --- Would it be possible to lift the restriction on account creation after the update? The new ability to tag spam should come handy...
