public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [Bug c/32102] New: -Wall stomps on -Wstrict-overflow
@ 2007-05-27 2:46 mec at google dot com
2007-05-27 3:45 ` [Bug c/32102] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (16 more replies)
0 siblings, 17 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: mec at google dot com @ 2007-05-27 2:46 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
This is with the 4.3-20070525 snapshot.
Test program:
void Alpha();
void Beta() {
int i;
for (i = 1; i > 0; ++i)
Alpha();
}
This invocation produces no warnings:
/home/mec/gcc-4.3-20070525/install/bin/gcc -O2 -S -Wstrict-overflow=2 -Wall
z1.c
This invocation produces warnings:
/home/mec/gcc-4.3-20070525/install/bin/gcc -O2 -S -Wall -Wstrict-overflow=2
z1.c
z1.c: In function 'Beta':
z1.c:5: warning: assuming signed overflow does not occur when simplifying
conditional to constant
It looks like -Wall sets the strict overflow warning level to 1, quietly
stomping on the earlier setting.
--
Summary: -Wall stomps on -Wstrict-overflow
Product: gcc
Version: 4.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: mec at google dot com
GCC build triplet: i686-pc-linux-gnu
GCC host triplet: i686-pc-linux-gnu
GCC target triplet: i686-pc-linux-gnu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32102
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* [Bug c/32102] -Wall stomps on -Wstrict-overflow
2007-05-27 2:46 [Bug c/32102] New: -Wall stomps on -Wstrict-overflow mec at google dot com
@ 2007-05-27 3:45 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-05-29 13:48 ` ian at airs dot com
` (15 subsequent siblings)
16 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2007-05-27 3:45 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-05-27 03:45 -------
I don't think this is a bug, -Wall enable -Wstrict-overflow=1 so you have
-Wstrict-overflow=2 -Wstrict-overflow=1 (-Wstrict-overflow is the same as
-Wstrict-overflow=2). This is just like any other option like -fno-tree-vrp
-O2.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32102
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* [Bug c/32102] -Wall stomps on -Wstrict-overflow
2007-05-27 2:46 [Bug c/32102] New: -Wall stomps on -Wstrict-overflow mec at google dot com
2007-05-27 3:45 ` [Bug c/32102] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2007-05-29 13:48 ` ian at airs dot com
2008-01-18 18:48 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (14 subsequent siblings)
16 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: ian at airs dot com @ 2007-05-29 13:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #2 from ian at airs dot com 2007-05-29 13:48 -------
I think that having -Wall clobber -Wstrict-overflow in this way is confusing.
This isn't reversing the setting of the option, it's changing its level.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32102
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* [Bug c/32102] -Wall stomps on -Wstrict-overflow
2007-05-27 2:46 [Bug c/32102] New: -Wall stomps on -Wstrict-overflow mec at google dot com
2007-05-27 3:45 ` [Bug c/32102] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-05-29 13:48 ` ian at airs dot com
@ 2008-01-18 18:48 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
2008-01-18 19:11 ` ismail at pardus dot org dot tr
` (13 subsequent siblings)
16 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: manu at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2008-01-18 18:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #3 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-18 18:44 -------
*** Bug 34843 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
manu at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |ismail at pardus dot org dot
| |tr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32102
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* [Bug c/32102] -Wall stomps on -Wstrict-overflow
2007-05-27 2:46 [Bug c/32102] New: -Wall stomps on -Wstrict-overflow mec at google dot com
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2008-01-18 18:48 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2008-01-18 19:11 ` ismail at pardus dot org dot tr
2008-01-18 19:30 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (12 subsequent siblings)
16 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: ismail at pardus dot org dot tr @ 2008-01-18 19:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #4 from ismail at pardus dot org dot tr 2008-01-18 18:46 -------
I think then -Wall shouldn't enable -Wstrict-overflow at all. Because current
situation is counter intuitive.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32102
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* [Bug c/32102] -Wall stomps on -Wstrict-overflow
2007-05-27 2:46 [Bug c/32102] New: -Wall stomps on -Wstrict-overflow mec at google dot com
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2008-01-18 19:11 ` ismail at pardus dot org dot tr
@ 2008-01-18 19:30 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
2008-01-18 19:42 ` ismail at pardus dot org dot tr
` (11 subsequent siblings)
16 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: manu at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2008-01-18 19:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #5 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-18 19:02 -------
(In reply to comment #4)
> I think then -Wall shouldn't enable -Wstrict-overflow at all. Because current
> situation is counter intuitive.
>
This a bug. A quick fix is:
Index: gcc/c-opts.c
===================================================================
--- gcc/c-opts.c (revision 131530)
+++ gcc/c-opts.c (working copy)
@@ -403,7 +403,8 @@
warn_switch = value;
set_Wstrict_aliasing (value);
warn_address = value;
- warn_strict_overflow = value;
+ if (warn_strict_overflow < 2)
+ warn_strict_overflow = value;
warn_array_bounds = value;
/* Only warn about unknown pragmas that are not in system
As you can see above, the same happens for other options, e.g.,
-Wstrict-aliasing=2 -Wall.
My proposal to fix this is here:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2007-05/msg00719.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2007-05/msg00724.html
--
manu at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|0000-00-00 00:00:00 |2008-01-18 19:02:48
date| |
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32102
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* [Bug c/32102] -Wall stomps on -Wstrict-overflow
2007-05-27 2:46 [Bug c/32102] New: -Wall stomps on -Wstrict-overflow mec at google dot com
` (4 preceding siblings ...)
2008-01-18 19:30 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2008-01-18 19:42 ` ismail at pardus dot org dot tr
2008-01-19 8:09 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (10 subsequent siblings)
16 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: ismail at pardus dot org dot tr @ 2008-01-18 19:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #6 from ismail at pardus dot org dot tr 2008-01-18 19:11 -------
Manu,
Your fix looks quite obvious, could you send it to gcc-patches so we can fix
this before the freeze? Thanks for the quick fix btw.
Regards,
ismail
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32102
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* [Bug c/32102] -Wall stomps on -Wstrict-overflow
2007-05-27 2:46 [Bug c/32102] New: -Wall stomps on -Wstrict-overflow mec at google dot com
` (5 preceding siblings ...)
2008-01-18 19:42 ` ismail at pardus dot org dot tr
@ 2008-01-19 8:09 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
2008-01-20 14:40 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (9 subsequent siblings)
16 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: manu at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2008-01-19 8:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #7 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-19 01:40 -------
(In reply to comment #6)
>
> Your fix looks quite obvious, could you send it to gcc-patches so we can fix
> this before the freeze? Thanks for the quick fix btw.
>
That fix is too simple. It doesn't handle -Wno-strict-overflow -Wall, for
example. It also needs testcases.
I am testing a better patch.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32102
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* [Bug c/32102] -Wall stomps on -Wstrict-overflow
2007-05-27 2:46 [Bug c/32102] New: -Wall stomps on -Wstrict-overflow mec at google dot com
` (6 preceding siblings ...)
2008-01-19 8:09 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2008-01-20 14:40 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
2008-01-21 1:52 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (8 subsequent siblings)
16 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: manu at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2008-01-20 14:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #8 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-20 13:38 -------
(In reply to comment #2)
> I think that having -Wall clobber -Wstrict-overflow in this way is confusing.
> This isn't reversing the setting of the option, it's changing its level.
>
Ian, should the above testcase actually give a warning? I am testing revision
131656 and I cannot get a warning no matter what value of -Wstrict-overflow or
optimisation level I try.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32102
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* [Bug c/32102] -Wall stomps on -Wstrict-overflow
2007-05-27 2:46 [Bug c/32102] New: -Wall stomps on -Wstrict-overflow mec at google dot com
` (7 preceding siblings ...)
2008-01-20 14:40 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2008-01-21 1:52 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
2008-01-21 20:50 ` ian at airs dot com
` (7 subsequent siblings)
16 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: manu at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2008-01-21 1:52 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #9 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-21 01:10 -------
*** Bug 34841 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
manu at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |sergstesh at yahoo dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32102
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* [Bug c/32102] -Wall stomps on -Wstrict-overflow
2007-05-27 2:46 [Bug c/32102] New: -Wall stomps on -Wstrict-overflow mec at google dot com
` (8 preceding siblings ...)
2008-01-21 1:52 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2008-01-21 20:50 ` ian at airs dot com
2008-01-21 21:01 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (6 subsequent siblings)
16 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: ian at airs dot com @ 2008-01-21 20:50 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #10 from ian at airs dot com 2008-01-21 20:40 -------
This test case will give a warning with mainline with -Wstrict-overflow (aka
-Wstrict-overflow=2) but not with -Wall (which implies -Wstrict-overflow=1).
void Alpha();
void Beta() {
int i;
for (i = 1; i > 0; i += i)
Alpha();
}
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32102
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* [Bug c/32102] -Wall stomps on -Wstrict-overflow
2007-05-27 2:46 [Bug c/32102] New: -Wall stomps on -Wstrict-overflow mec at google dot com
` (9 preceding siblings ...)
2008-01-21 20:50 ` ian at airs dot com
@ 2008-01-21 21:01 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
2008-01-22 14:20 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (5 subsequent siblings)
16 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: manu at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2008-01-21 21:01 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #11 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-21 20:54 -------
(In reply to comment #10)
> This test case will give a warning with mainline with -Wstrict-overflow (aka
> -Wstrict-overflow=2) but not with -Wall (which implies -Wstrict-overflow=1).
>
I think that testcase is structurally equivalent to the one I have included in
my proposed (and unreviewed, ;-) patch.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32102
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* [Bug c/32102] -Wall stomps on -Wstrict-overflow
2007-05-27 2:46 [Bug c/32102] New: -Wall stomps on -Wstrict-overflow mec at google dot com
` (10 preceding siblings ...)
2008-01-21 21:01 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2008-01-22 14:20 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
2008-01-22 14:46 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (4 subsequent siblings)
16 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: manu at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2008-01-22 14:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #12 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-22 14:12 -------
Subject: Bug 32102
Author: manu
Date: Tue Jan 22 14:11:44 2008
New Revision: 131720
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=131720
Log:
2008-01-22 Manuel Lopez-Ibanez <manu@gcc.gnu.org>
PR 32102
* doc/invoke.texi (-Wall): -Wall enables -Wstrict-overflow=1.
* flags.h (warn_strict_aliasing): Remove.
(warn_strict_overflow): Remove.
* opts.c (warn_strict_aliasing): Remove.
(warn_strict_overflow): Remove.
* c-opts.c (c_common_handle_option): -Wall only sets
-Wstrict-aliasing or -Wstrict-overflow if they are uninitialized.
(c_common_post_options): Give default values to -Wstrict-aliasing
and -Wstrict-overflow if they are uninitialized.
* common.opt (Wstrict-aliasing): Specify Var and Init.
(Wstrict-overflow): Likewise.
testsuite/
* gcc.dg/Wstrict-overflow-21.c: New.
* g++.dg/warn/Wstrict-aliasing-8.C: New.
Modified:
trunk/gcc/ChangeLog
trunk/gcc/c-opts.c
trunk/gcc/common.opt
trunk/gcc/doc/invoke.texi
trunk/gcc/flags.h
trunk/gcc/opts.c
trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32102
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* [Bug c/32102] -Wall stomps on -Wstrict-overflow
2007-05-27 2:46 [Bug c/32102] New: -Wall stomps on -Wstrict-overflow mec at google dot com
` (11 preceding siblings ...)
2008-01-22 14:20 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2008-01-22 14:46 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
2008-01-22 14:47 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (3 subsequent siblings)
16 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: manu at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2008-01-22 14:46 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #13 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-22 14:19 -------
Subject: Bug 32102
Author: manu
Date: Tue Jan 22 14:19:01 2008
New Revision: 131722
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=131722
Log:
Missed testcases in earlier commit.
2008-01-22 Manuel Lopez-Ibanez <manu@gcc.gnu.org>
PR 32102
testsuite/
* gcc.dg/Wstrict-overflow-21.c: New.
* g++.dg/warn/Wstrict-aliasing-8.C: New.
Added:
trunk/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/warn/Wstrict-aliasing-8.C
trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/Wstrict-overflow-21.c
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32102
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* [Bug c/32102] -Wall stomps on -Wstrict-overflow
2007-05-27 2:46 [Bug c/32102] New: -Wall stomps on -Wstrict-overflow mec at google dot com
` (12 preceding siblings ...)
2008-01-22 14:46 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2008-01-22 14:47 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
2008-01-23 6:43 ` ian at airs dot com
` (2 subsequent siblings)
16 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: manu at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2008-01-22 14:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #14 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-22 14:22 -------
When you try to do things faster, you end up taking more time.
Anyway, fixed for GCC 4.3.
Ian,
do you think this should/could be backported to GCC 4.2 or should we just close
it as fixed?
--
manu at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Target Milestone|--- |4.3.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32102
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* [Bug c/32102] -Wall stomps on -Wstrict-overflow
2007-05-27 2:46 [Bug c/32102] New: -Wall stomps on -Wstrict-overflow mec at google dot com
` (13 preceding siblings ...)
2008-01-22 14:47 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2008-01-23 6:43 ` ian at airs dot com
2008-01-27 18:52 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
2008-01-27 18:55 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
16 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: ian at airs dot com @ 2008-01-23 6:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #15 from ian at airs dot com 2008-01-23 05:21 -------
I would be in favor of backporting to the gcc 4.2 branch. The option is new in
gcc 4.2, and this will make it less confusing to use.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32102
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* [Bug c/32102] -Wall stomps on -Wstrict-overflow
2007-05-27 2:46 [Bug c/32102] New: -Wall stomps on -Wstrict-overflow mec at google dot com
` (14 preceding siblings ...)
2008-01-23 6:43 ` ian at airs dot com
@ 2008-01-27 18:52 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
2008-01-27 18:55 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
16 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: manu at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2008-01-27 18:52 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #16 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-27 18:37 -------
Subject: Bug 32102
Author: manu
Date: Sun Jan 27 18:36:59 2008
New Revision: 131887
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=131887
Log:
2008-01-27 Manuel Lopez-Ibanez <manu@gcc.gnu.org>
PR 32102
* flags.h (warn_strict_aliasing): Remove.
(warn_strict_overflow): Remove.
* opts.c (warn_strict_aliasing): Remove.
(warn_strict_overflow): Remove.
* c-opts.c (c_common_handle_option): -Wall only sets
-Wstrict-aliasing or -Wstrict-overflow if they are uninitialized.
(c_common_post_options): Give default values to -Wstrict-aliasing
and -Wstrict-overflow if they are uninitialized.
* common.opt (Wstrict-aliasing): Specify Var and Init.
(Wstrict-overflow): Likewise.
testsuite/
* gcc.dg/Wstrict-overflow-21.c: New.
* g++.dg/warn/Wstrict-aliasing-8.C: New.
Added:
branches/gcc-4_2-branch/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/warn/Wstrict-aliasing-8.C
branches/gcc-4_2-branch/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/Wstrict-overflow-21.c
Modified:
branches/gcc-4_2-branch/gcc/ChangeLog
branches/gcc-4_2-branch/gcc/c-opts.c
branches/gcc-4_2-branch/gcc/common.opt
branches/gcc-4_2-branch/gcc/flags.h
branches/gcc-4_2-branch/gcc/opts.c
branches/gcc-4_2-branch/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32102
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* [Bug c/32102] -Wall stomps on -Wstrict-overflow
2007-05-27 2:46 [Bug c/32102] New: -Wall stomps on -Wstrict-overflow mec at google dot com
` (15 preceding siblings ...)
2008-01-27 18:52 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2008-01-27 18:55 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
16 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: manu at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2008-01-27 18:55 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #17 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-27 18:39 -------
Fixed in GCC 4.2.3
--
manu at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution| |FIXED
Target Milestone|4.3.0 |4.2.3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32102
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2008-01-27 18:39 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2007-05-27 2:46 [Bug c/32102] New: -Wall stomps on -Wstrict-overflow mec at google dot com
2007-05-27 3:45 ` [Bug c/32102] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-05-29 13:48 ` ian at airs dot com
2008-01-18 18:48 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
2008-01-18 19:11 ` ismail at pardus dot org dot tr
2008-01-18 19:30 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
2008-01-18 19:42 ` ismail at pardus dot org dot tr
2008-01-19 8:09 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
2008-01-20 14:40 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
2008-01-21 1:52 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
2008-01-21 20:50 ` ian at airs dot com
2008-01-21 21:01 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
2008-01-22 14:20 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
2008-01-22 14:46 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
2008-01-22 14:47 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
2008-01-23 6:43 ` ian at airs dot com
2008-01-27 18:52 ` manu at gcc dot gnu dot org
2008-01-27 18:55 ` manu 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).