From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 13039 invoked by alias); 10 Jan 2004 16:16:50 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 13019 invoked by uid 48); 10 Jan 2004 16:16:49 -0000 Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2004 16:16:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20040110161649.13018.qmail@sources.redhat.com> From: "pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org In-Reply-To: <20030618005403.11231.eranian@hpl.hp.com> References: <20030618005403.11231.eranian@hpl.hp.com> Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug debug/11231] [3.3/3.4 regression] undefined array size inside struct cause segfault with -g X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-SW-Source: 2004-01/txt/msg00926.txt.bz2 List-Id: ------- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-01-10 16:16 ------- (In reply to comment #14) > Subject: Re: [3.3/3.4 regression] undefined array size inside struct cause segfault with -g > > "pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org" writes: > > | Fixed for 3.4, thanks Jim. > > is a backport to gcc-3_3-branch feasable? Yes it is one liner (really two but it is a simple fix). - Andrew -- What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11231