public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [Bug fortran/33298] New: Wrong code for SPREAD on dummy arguments
@ 2007-09-04 7:20 toon at moene dot indiv dot nluug dot nl
2007-09-04 7:49 ` [Bug fortran/33298] " jpr at csc dot fi
` (11 more replies)
0 siblings, 12 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: toon at moene dot indiv dot nluug dot nl @ 2007-09-04 7:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
This code:
REAL X(2,3), Y(2)
Y=[1.,2.]
CALL SUB(X,Y)
DO I = 1, 3
PRINT*,X(:,I)
ENDDO
END
SUBROUTINE SUB(A,B)
REAL A(:,:), B(:)
A(:,:) = SPREAD(B(:),2,SIZE(A,2))
END
results in:
0.000000 0.000000
0.000000 0.000000
0.000000 0.000000
using:
/usr/snp/bin/gfortran -static -v -g -O2 -fbacktrace spread.f
Driving: /usr/snp/bin/gfortran -static -v -g -O2 -fbacktrace spread.f
-lgfortranbegin -lgfortran -lm
Using built-in specs.
Target: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
Configured with: ../trunk/configure --prefix=/usr/snp/ --disable-multilib
--disable-nls --enable-languages=fortran
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.3.0 20070903 (experimental) (GCC)
/usr/snp/bin/../libexec/gcc/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/4.3.0/f951 spread.f
-ffixed-form -quiet -dumpbase spread.f -mtune=generic -auxbase spread -g -O2
-version -fbacktrace -fintrinsic-modules-path
/usr/snp/bin/../lib/gcc/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/4.3.0/finclude -o
/tmp/ccjGK59d.s
GNU F95 (GCC) version 4.3.0 20070903 (experimental) (x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu)
compiled by GNU C version 4.3.0 20070903 (experimental), GMP version
4.2.1, MPFR version 2.3.0-rc1.
GGC heuristics: --param ggc-min-expand=30 --param ggc-min-heapsize=4096
as -V -Qy -o /tmp/cc53anSf.o /tmp/ccjGK59d.s
GNU assembler version 2.17.90 (x86_64-linux-gnu) using BFD version (GNU
Binutils for Debian) 2.17.90.20070812
/usr/snp/bin/../libexec/gcc/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/4.3.0/collect2 -m
elf_x86_64 -static /usr/lib/../lib64/crt1.o /usr/lib/../lib64/crti.o
/usr/snp/bin/../lib/gcc/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/4.3.0/crtbeginT.o
-L/usr/snp/bin/../lib/gcc/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/4.3.0
-L/usr/snp/bin/../lib/gcc
-L/usr/snp/bin/../lib/gcc/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/4.3.0/../../../../lib64
-L/lib/../lib64 -L/usr/lib/../lib64
-L/usr/snp/bin/../lib/gcc/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/4.3.0/../../..
/tmp/cc53anSf.o -lgfortranbegin -lgfortran -lm --start-group -lgcc -lgcc_eh -lc
--end-group /usr/snp/bin/../lib/gcc/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/4.3.0/crtend.o
/usr/lib/../lib64/crtn.o
Debian's testing gfortran-4.2 gave me another bunch of nonsense:
-4.5149084E-10 4.5916347E-41
-4.5151327E-10 4.5916347E-41
-4.5151283E-10 4.5916347E-41
Trying to print the SPREAD expression directly gave me a segmentation fault
using the above gfortran 4.2 and an empty line using 4.3.
--
Summary: Wrong code for SPREAD on dummy arguments
Product: gcc
Version: 4.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: toon at moene dot indiv dot nluug dot nl
GCC build triplet: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
GCC host triplet: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
GCC target triplet: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33298
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* [Bug fortran/33298] Wrong code for SPREAD on dummy arguments
2007-09-04 7:20 [Bug fortran/33298] New: Wrong code for SPREAD on dummy arguments toon at moene dot indiv dot nluug dot nl
@ 2007-09-04 7:49 ` jpr at csc dot fi
2007-09-04 7:57 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (10 subsequent siblings)
11 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: jpr at csc dot fi @ 2007-09-04 7:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #1 from jpr at csc dot fi 2007-09-04 07:49 -------
The code is invalid without explicit interface to SUB().
Modified code:
REAL X(2,3), Y(2)
Y=[1.,2.]
CALL SUB(X,Y)
DO I = 1, 3
PRINT*,X(:,I)
ENDDO
CONTAINS
SUBROUTINE SUB(A,B)
REAL A(:,:), B(:)
A(:,:) = SPREAD(B(:),2,SIZE(A,2))
END SUBROUTINE SUB
END
works just fine. Alternatively
REAL X(2,3), Y(2)
Y=[1.,2.]
CALL SUB(X,Y,size(y,1),size(y,2))
DO I = 1, 3
PRINT*,X(:,I)
ENDDO
END
SUBROUTINE SUB(A,B,n,m)
INTEGER n,m
REAL A(n,m), B(n)
A(:,:) = SPREAD(B(:),2,SIZE(A,2))
END
also works as expected.
If the main program and SUB are compiled together, the compiler could
of course diagnose this, as e.g. pathscale does:
SUBROUTINE SUB(A,B)
^
pathf95-1277 pathf90: ERROR SUB, File = t.f90, Line = 9, Column = 18
Procedure "SUB" is referenced at line 3 (t.f90). It must have an explicit
interface specified.
Regards, Juha
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33298
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* [Bug fortran/33298] Wrong code for SPREAD on dummy arguments
2007-09-04 7:20 [Bug fortran/33298] New: Wrong code for SPREAD on dummy arguments toon at moene dot indiv dot nluug dot nl
2007-09-04 7:49 ` [Bug fortran/33298] " jpr at csc dot fi
@ 2007-09-04 7:57 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-09-04 8:11 ` toon at moene dot indiv dot nluug dot nl
` (9 subsequent siblings)
11 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2007-09-04 7:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #2 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-04 07:57 -------
CLOSE as invalid as subroutines with assumed-shaped dummy arguments require an
explicit interface.
The whole-file checking - which would diagnose this as error - is planned for
GCC 4.4.0. See http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/GFortran43 and, e.g., PR 26227.
--
burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution| |INVALID
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33298
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* [Bug fortran/33298] Wrong code for SPREAD on dummy arguments
2007-09-04 7:20 [Bug fortran/33298] New: Wrong code for SPREAD on dummy arguments toon at moene dot indiv dot nluug dot nl
2007-09-04 7:49 ` [Bug fortran/33298] " jpr at csc dot fi
2007-09-04 7:57 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2007-09-04 8:11 ` toon at moene dot indiv dot nluug dot nl
2007-09-04 10:15 ` [Bug fortran/33298] Wrong code for SPREAD on zero sized " toon at moene dot indiv dot nluug dot nl
` (8 subsequent siblings)
11 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: toon at moene dot indiv dot nluug dot nl @ 2007-09-04 8:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #3 from toon at moene dot indiv dot nluug dot nl 2007-09-04 08:11 -------
Yeah, I have to come up with a better example. In the original code that I
reduced, the interface came from a module file.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33298
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* [Bug fortran/33298] Wrong code for SPREAD on zero sized dummy arguments
2007-09-04 7:20 [Bug fortran/33298] New: Wrong code for SPREAD on dummy arguments toon at moene dot indiv dot nluug dot nl
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2007-09-04 8:11 ` toon at moene dot indiv dot nluug dot nl
@ 2007-09-04 10:15 ` toon at moene dot indiv dot nluug dot nl
2007-09-04 10:51 ` [Bug libfortran/33298] Wrong code for SPREAD on zero-sized arrays fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (7 subsequent siblings)
11 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: toon at moene dot indiv dot nluug dot nl @ 2007-09-04 10:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #4 from toon at moene dot indiv dot nluug dot nl 2007-09-04 10:15 -------
Second try, now with interface and using zero sized arrays:
$ cat spread.f
INTERFACE SUB
SUBROUTINE SUB(P,Q)
REAL, INTENT(OUT) :: P(:,:)
REAL, INTENT(IN) :: Q(:)
END SUBROUTINE
END INTERFACE
REAL, ALLOCATABLE :: X(:,:), Y(:)
ALLOCATE(X(0,3))
ALLOCATE(Y(0))
! Y=[1.,2.]
CALL SUB(X,Y)
DO I = 1, 3
PRINT*,X(:,I)
ENDDO
END
SUBROUTINE SUB(A,B)
REAL, INTENT(OUT) :: A(:,:)
REAL, INTENT(IN) :: B(:)
A(:,:) = SPREAD(B(:),2,SIZE(A,2))
END
$ /usr/snp/bin/gfortran -g -O2 -static -fbacktrace spread.f
$ ./a.out
Program received signal 11 (SIGSEGV): Segmentation fault.
Backtrace for this error:
+ function __restore_rt (0x4185D0)
from file libgcc2.c
+ function memcpy (0x432D85)
+ function spread_internal (0x40A50F)
at line 145 of file spread_generic.c
+ function sub_ (0x400404)
at line 16 of file spread.f
+ in the main program
at line 11 of file spread.f
+ function __libc_start_main (0x4138E7)
--
toon at moene dot indiv dot nluug dot nl changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|RESOLVED |UNCONFIRMED
Resolution|INVALID |
Summary|Wrong code for SPREAD on |Wrong code for SPREAD on
|dummy arguments |zero sized dummy arguments
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33298
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* [Bug libfortran/33298] Wrong code for SPREAD on zero-sized arrays
2007-09-04 7:20 [Bug fortran/33298] New: Wrong code for SPREAD on dummy arguments toon at moene dot indiv dot nluug dot nl
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2007-09-04 10:15 ` [Bug fortran/33298] Wrong code for SPREAD on zero sized " toon at moene dot indiv dot nluug dot nl
@ 2007-09-04 10:51 ` fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-09-04 13:04 ` toon at moene dot indiv dot nluug dot nl
` (6 subsequent siblings)
11 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2007-09-04 10:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #5 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-04 10:51 -------
Reduced testcase:
real :: x(0,3), y(0)
x = spread(y,2,3)
end
Backtrace:
#0 0x0000000000431600 in memcpy ()
#1 0x000000000040400f in spread_internal (ret=<value optimized out>,
source=<value optimized out>, along=<value optimized out>,
pncopies=<value optimized out>, size=4)
at ../../../../trunk2/libgfortran/intrinsics/spread_generic.c:148
#2 0x0000000000400342 in MAIN__ () at a.f90:2
--
fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Component|fortran |libfortran
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
GCC build triplet|x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu |
GCC host triplet|x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu |
GCC target triplet|x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu |
Keywords| |wrong-code
Known to fail| |4.3.0
Last reconfirmed|0000-00-00 00:00:00 |2007-09-04 10:51:29
date| |
Summary|Wrong code for SPREAD on |Wrong code for SPREAD on
|zero sized dummy arguments |zero-sized arrays
Target Milestone|--- |4.3.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33298
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* [Bug libfortran/33298] Wrong code for SPREAD on zero-sized arrays
2007-09-04 7:20 [Bug fortran/33298] New: Wrong code for SPREAD on dummy arguments toon at moene dot indiv dot nluug dot nl
` (4 preceding siblings ...)
2007-09-04 10:51 ` [Bug libfortran/33298] Wrong code for SPREAD on zero-sized arrays fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2007-09-04 13:04 ` toon at moene dot indiv dot nluug dot nl
2007-09-04 21:03 ` tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (5 subsequent siblings)
11 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: toon at moene dot indiv dot nluug dot nl @ 2007-09-04 13:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #6 from toon at moene dot indiv dot nluug dot nl 2007-09-04 13:04 -------
Quoting spread_generic.c:
145 for (n = 0; n < ncopies; n++)
146 {
147 memcpy (dest, sptr, size);
148 dest += rdelta;
149 }
The C 99 Standard has the following to say about the mem* functions (7.21.2.1
ff):
Where an argument declared as size_t n specifies the length of the array for a
function, n can have the value zero on a call to that function. Unless
explicitly stated otherwise in the description of a particular function in this
subclause, pointer arguments on such a call shall still have valid values, as
described in 7.1.4.
So "size" can be zero, *but the the pointer arguments on such a call shall
still have valid values.*
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33298
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* [Bug libfortran/33298] Wrong code for SPREAD on zero-sized arrays
2007-09-04 7:20 [Bug fortran/33298] New: Wrong code for SPREAD on dummy arguments toon at moene dot indiv dot nluug dot nl
` (5 preceding siblings ...)
2007-09-04 13:04 ` toon at moene dot indiv dot nluug dot nl
@ 2007-09-04 21:03 ` tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-09-06 8:56 ` toon at moene dot indiv dot nluug dot nl
` (4 subsequent siblings)
11 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2007-09-04 21:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #7 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-04 21:03 -------
This one should be fairly straightforward.
Mine :-)
--
tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot
| |org
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot
|dot org |org
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|2007-09-04 10:51:29 |2007-09-04 21:03:23
date| |
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33298
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* [Bug libfortran/33298] Wrong code for SPREAD on zero-sized arrays
2007-09-04 7:20 [Bug fortran/33298] New: Wrong code for SPREAD on dummy arguments toon at moene dot indiv dot nluug dot nl
` (6 preceding siblings ...)
2007-09-04 21:03 ` tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2007-09-06 8:56 ` toon at moene dot indiv dot nluug dot nl
2007-09-06 11:57 ` patchapp at dberlin dot org
` (3 subsequent siblings)
11 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: toon at moene dot indiv dot nluug dot nl @ 2007-09-06 8:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #8 from toon at moene dot indiv dot nluug dot nl 2007-09-06 08:56 -------
Wouldn't it be an option to simply bail out early (i.e., after the error
checks) in case of size == 0 ?
E.g., like this:
62
63 rrank = srank + 1;
64 if (rrank > GFC_MAX_DIMENSIONS)
65 runtime_error ("return rank too large in spread()");
66
67 if (*along > rrank)
68 runtime_error ("dim outside of rank in spread()");
if (size == 0)
return
Or do we actually have to set something on return ?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33298
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* [Bug libfortran/33298] Wrong code for SPREAD on zero-sized arrays
2007-09-04 7:20 [Bug fortran/33298] New: Wrong code for SPREAD on dummy arguments toon at moene dot indiv dot nluug dot nl
` (7 preceding siblings ...)
2007-09-06 8:56 ` toon at moene dot indiv dot nluug dot nl
@ 2007-09-06 11:57 ` patchapp at dberlin dot org
2007-09-06 19:26 ` tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (2 subsequent siblings)
11 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: patchapp at dberlin dot org @ 2007-09-06 11:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #9 from patchapp at dberlin dot org 2007-09-06 11:57 -------
Subject: Bug number PR 33298
A patch for this bug has been added to the patch tracker.
The mailing list url for the patch is
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-09/msg00394.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33298
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* [Bug libfortran/33298] Wrong code for SPREAD on zero-sized arrays
2007-09-04 7:20 [Bug fortran/33298] New: Wrong code for SPREAD on dummy arguments toon at moene dot indiv dot nluug dot nl
` (8 preceding siblings ...)
2007-09-06 11:57 ` patchapp at dberlin dot org
@ 2007-09-06 19:26 ` tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-09-06 21:14 ` tkoenig at alice-dsl dot net
2007-09-06 21:23 ` tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org
11 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2007-09-06 19:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #10 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-06 19:25 -------
Subject: Bug 33298
Author: tkoenig
Date: Thu Sep 6 19:25:30 2007
New Revision: 128206
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=128206
Log:
2007-09-06 Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@gcc.gnu.org>
PR fortran/33298
* intrinsics/spread_generic.c(spread_internal): Enable
bounds checking by comparing extents if the bounds_check
option has been set. If any extent is <=0, return early.
2007-09-06 Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@gcc.gnu.org>
PR fortran/33298
* spread_zerosize_1.f90: New test case.
* spread_bounds_1.f90: New test case.
Added:
trunk/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/spread_bounds_1.f90
trunk/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/spread_zerosize_1.f90
Modified:
trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
trunk/libgfortran/ChangeLog
trunk/libgfortran/intrinsics/spread_generic.c
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33298
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* [Bug libfortran/33298] Wrong code for SPREAD on zero-sized arrays
2007-09-04 7:20 [Bug fortran/33298] New: Wrong code for SPREAD on dummy arguments toon at moene dot indiv dot nluug dot nl
` (9 preceding siblings ...)
2007-09-06 19:26 ` tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2007-09-06 21:14 ` tkoenig at alice-dsl dot net
2007-09-06 21:23 ` tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org
11 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: tkoenig at alice-dsl dot net @ 2007-09-06 21:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #11 from tkoenig at alice-dsl dot net 2007-09-06 21:13 -------
Subject: Re: Wrong code for SPREAD on zero-sized
arrays
Hi Toon,
>
> ------- Comment #8 from toon at moene dot indiv dot nluug dot nl 2007-09-06 08:56 -------
> Wouldn't it be an option to simply bail out early (i.e., after the error
> checks) in case of size == 0 ?
>
I think size is the size of an element in the array (in bytes), so
this wouldn't really help.
Thomas
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33298
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* [Bug libfortran/33298] Wrong code for SPREAD on zero-sized arrays
2007-09-04 7:20 [Bug fortran/33298] New: Wrong code for SPREAD on dummy arguments toon at moene dot indiv dot nluug dot nl
` (10 preceding siblings ...)
2007-09-06 21:14 ` tkoenig at alice-dsl dot net
@ 2007-09-06 21:23 ` tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org
11 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2007-09-06 21:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #12 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-06 21:23 -------
Fixed on trunk. Closing.
--
tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|ASSIGNED |RESOLVED
Resolution| |FIXED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33298
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2007-09-06 21:23 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2007-09-04 7:20 [Bug fortran/33298] New: Wrong code for SPREAD on dummy arguments toon at moene dot indiv dot nluug dot nl
2007-09-04 7:49 ` [Bug fortran/33298] " jpr at csc dot fi
2007-09-04 7:57 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-09-04 8:11 ` toon at moene dot indiv dot nluug dot nl
2007-09-04 10:15 ` [Bug fortran/33298] Wrong code for SPREAD on zero sized " toon at moene dot indiv dot nluug dot nl
2007-09-04 10:51 ` [Bug libfortran/33298] Wrong code for SPREAD on zero-sized arrays fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-09-04 13:04 ` toon at moene dot indiv dot nluug dot nl
2007-09-04 21:03 ` tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-09-06 8:56 ` toon at moene dot indiv dot nluug dot nl
2007-09-06 11:57 ` patchapp at dberlin dot org
2007-09-06 19:26 ` tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-09-06 21:14 ` tkoenig at alice-dsl dot net
2007-09-06 21:23 ` tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).