Richard Biener writes:
> On Thu, 9 May 2024, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>
>> On Thu, May 09, 2024 at 12:14:43PM +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>> > On Thu, May 09, 2024 at 12:04:38PM +0200, Rainer Orth wrote:
>> > > I just noticed that gcc/DATESTAMP wasn't updated yesterday and today,
>> > > staying at
On Thu, 9 May 2024, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Thu, May 09, 2024 at 12:14:43PM +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > On Thu, May 09, 2024 at 12:04:38PM +0200, Rainer Orth wrote:
> > > I just noticed that gcc/DATESTAMP wasn't updated yesterday and today,
> > > staying at 20240507.
> >
> > I think it is
On Thu, May 09, 2024 at 12:14:43PM +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Thu, May 09, 2024 at 12:04:38PM +0200, Rainer Orth wrote:
> > I just noticed that gcc/DATESTAMP wasn't updated yesterday and today,
> > staying at 20240507.
>
> I think it is because of the r15-268 commit, we do support
> This
On Thu, May 09, 2024 at 12:04:38PM +0200, Rainer Orth wrote:
> I just noticed that gcc/DATESTAMP wasn't updated yesterday and today,
> staying at 20240507.
I think it is because of the r15-268 commit, we do support
This reverts commit ...
when the referenced commit contains a ChangeLog message,
I just noticed that gcc/DATESTAMP wasn't updated yesterday and today,
staying at 20240507.
Rainer
--
-
Rainer Orth, Center for Biotechnology, Bielefeld University