From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 29818 invoked by alias); 22 Jul 2007 19:14:43 -0000 Received: (qmail 29788 invoked by uid 48); 22 Jul 2007 19:14:33 -0000 Date: Sun, 22 Jul 2007 19:14:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20070722191433.29787.qmail@sourceware.org> X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC References: Subject: [Bug fortran/31639] [4.1/4.2/4.3] ICE in gfc_conv_constant, at fortran/trans-const.c:348 with len In-Reply-To: Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org From: "kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org" Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2007-07/txt/msg02276.txt.bz2 ------- Comment #10 from kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-22 19:14 ------- (In reply to comment #9) > I don't know the fortran policy on closing bug reports with regressions; is > there no chance to backport the fix to the active branches? It isn't a gfortran policy. The general GCC policy is that only regression fixes can/should be backported. You would need to show that the code in comment #1 could be compiled with a version of gfortran that is older than 4.1.2 20061115; otherwise, this is simply a bug that finally got fixed. Additionally, there simply are too few gfortran developers to maintain 3 active branches. So, we have chosen to concentrate our effort on trunk. If a patch fixes a regression in 4.2, it may be backported but there is no guarantee. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31639