From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from colo.lackof.org (colo.lackof.org [198.49.126.79]) by dsl2.external.hp.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 08B93487E for ; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 17:17:31 -0700 (MST) Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2004 17:17:29 -0700 From: Grant Grundler To: Carlos O'Donell Subject: Re: [parisc-linux] glibc-2.3.3 & gcc-snapshot (3.5.0) pb Message-ID: <20040214001729.GA4727@colo.lackof.org> References: <20040211162702.GI990@baldric.uwo.ca> <402A4CA500001B4D@ocpmta2.freegates.net> <20040213194906.GA6760@baldric.uwo.ca> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <20040213194906.GA6760@baldric.uwo.ca> Cc: John David Anglin , James Morrison , parisc-linux@lists.parisc-linux.org List-Id: parisc-linux developers list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Fri, Feb 13, 2004 at 02:49:08PM -0500, Carlos O'Donell wrote: > Aggressive inlining, and inlining mistakes might cause the function to > disapper. Unless you can produce a *small* testcase the gcc team will > not look at the bug. You can't say "glibc doesn't build with gcc-3.5" > ... well I guess you can, but nobody will have a clue how to fix the > issue. And he should say *something*. Pointing at the problem is a first step towards fixing it. Don't wait until you have a "small" test case to point out a problem since one might never (have time to) find one. Even though I fix very few bugs these days, I'm grateful for every bug report. grant