From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 7651 invoked by alias); 25 Apr 2006 15:42:04 -0000 Received: (qmail 7601 invoked by uid 48); 25 Apr 2006 15:41:59 -0000 Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 15:42:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20060425154159.7598.qmail@sourceware.org> X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC References: Subject: [Bug target/27282] [4.2 regression] ICE in final_scan_insn, at final.c:2448 - could not split insn In-Reply-To: Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org From: "roger at eyesopen dot com" 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: 2006-04/txt/msg02195.txt.bz2 List-Id: ------- Comment #8 from roger at eyesopen dot com 2006-04-25 15:41 ------- Grr. David's patch is also good. Perhaps better if we follow the usual protocol of posting patches to gcc-patches *after* bootstrap and regression testing, for review and approval. Posting untested patch fragments to bugzilla without ChangeLog entries and asking for preapproval etc... seems to, in this instance at least, demonstrate why GCC has the contribution protocols that it has. Thanks to David for catching this. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27282