From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 17413 invoked by alias); 9 Mar 2006 19:17:11 -0000 Received: (qmail 17338 invoked by uid 48); 9 Mar 2006 19:17:06 -0000 Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2006 19:17:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20060309191706.17337.qmail@sourceware.org> X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC References: Subject: [Bug c++/26084] ICE (segfault) on C++ OpenMP code In-Reply-To: Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org From: "pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org" 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 X-SW-Source: 2006-03/txt/msg00989.txt.bz2 List-Id: ------- Comment #11 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-09 19:17 ------- (In reply to comment #10) > If you are so keen on closing PRs, close 26076 as a duplicate of this one. If you had written a status on this bug before I closed it as a dup, I would not have closed it as a dup because I would have read that it was not fully a dup. Also really a secondary bug should be opened for the other bug you found after fixing the reduced testcase with a new reduced testcase instead of not just agrueeing in this bug. There was no way to know what was going on without status of the bug in the bug comments itself. (Note this applies for all the bug assigned to people). -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26084