From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 26382 invoked by alias); 30 Sep 2010 16:01:13 -0000 Received: (qmail 26335 invoked by uid 22791); 30 Sep 2010 16:01:11 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.3 required=5.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,AWL,BAYES_00,MISSING_MID X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from localhost (HELO gcc.gnu.org) (127.0.0.1) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Thu, 30 Sep 2010 16:01:03 +0000 From: "jason at gcc dot gnu.org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug c/32511] [4.4/4.5/4.6 regression] GCC rejects inline+weak function X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: c X-Bugzilla-Keywords: rejects-valid X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: jason at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Status: REOPENED X-Bugzilla-Priority: P2 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 4.4.0 X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: In-Reply-To: References: X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2010 19:17:00 -0000 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: 2010-09/txt/msg03277.txt.bz2 Message-ID: <20100930191700.K0aUH3_6oJRuP-L8MeNkZ11ymA56Rgn6DCWn9Qu3-X4@z> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32511 --- Comment #11 from Jason Merrill 2010-09-30 16:01:01 UTC --- I don't see it as different at all; I am arguing that the initial bug report was not actually a bug, and that the patch should be reverted.