public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [Bug c++/28017] lack of guard variables for explicitly instantiated template static data
       [not found] <bug-28017-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
@ 2024-04-03 23:13 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2024-04-03 23:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: gcc-bugs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28017

Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Keywords|                            |wrong-code
           See Also|                            |https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
                   |                            |a/show_bug.cgi?id=80320
      Known to fail|                            |

--- Comment #14 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
I think this and PR 80320 both have the same underlying issue.

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread

* [Bug c++/28017] lack of guard variables for explicitly instantiated template static data
  2006-06-13 19:13 [Bug c++/28017] New: " hhinnant at apple dot com
                   ` (11 preceding siblings ...)
  2006-06-21  5:08 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2009-01-27 17:26 ` bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org
  12 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2009-01-27 17:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: gcc-bugs



------- Comment #13 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org  2009-01-27 17:26 -------
*** Bug 25956 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***


-- 

bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |jkp at kirkconsulting dot co
                   |                            |dot uk


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28017


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread

* [Bug c++/28017] lack of guard variables for explicitly instantiated template static data
  2006-06-13 19:13 [Bug c++/28017] New: " hhinnant at apple dot com
                   ` (10 preceding siblings ...)
  2006-06-21  5:05 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2006-06-21  5:08 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
  2009-01-27 17:26 ` bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org
  12 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2006-06-21  5:08 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: gcc-bugs



------- Comment #12 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2006-06-21 05:05 -------
-fno-weak worked in 3.0.4 and below, though I don't know if it was really
working so I am not marking this as a regression.


-- 

pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Known to fail|                            |3.2.3 3.4.0 4.0.0 4.1.0
                   |                            |4.2.0
   Target Milestone|4.0.4                       |---


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28017


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread

* [Bug c++/28017] lack of guard variables for explicitly instantiated template static data
  2006-06-13 19:13 [Bug c++/28017] New: " hhinnant at apple dot com
                   ` (9 preceding siblings ...)
  2006-06-19 18:22 ` hhinnant at apple dot com
@ 2006-06-21  5:05 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
  2006-06-21  5:08 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
  2009-01-27 17:26 ` bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org
  12 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2006-06-21  5:05 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: gcc-bugs



------- Comment #11 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2006-06-21 04:50 -------
Actually I take that back, it is also a problem with targets that don't have
weak symbols too.
On x86_64-linux-gnu with the additional flag of -fno-weak:
pc64:~> g++ test.cc test1.cc -fno-weak
pc64:~> ./a.out
new: mString has value 0x502010
new: mString has value 0x502030
delete: mString has value 0x502030
delete: mString has value 0x502030
*** glibc detected *** double free or corruption (fasttop): 0x0000000000502030
***
Abort

So the new part of the test should be just shrunk back to testing
DECL_EXPLICIT_INSTANTIATION instead of the other parts too.


-- 

pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
 GCC target triplet|*-darwin                    |non weak
   Target Milestone|---                         |4.0.4


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28017


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread

* [Bug c++/28017] lack of guard variables for explicitly instantiated template static data
  2006-06-13 19:13 [Bug c++/28017] New: " hhinnant at apple dot com
                   ` (8 preceding siblings ...)
  2006-06-13 23:28 ` hhinnant at apple dot com
@ 2006-06-19 18:22 ` hhinnant at apple dot com
  2006-06-21  5:05 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
                   ` (2 subsequent siblings)
  12 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: hhinnant at apple dot com @ 2006-06-19 18:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: gcc-bugs



------- Comment #10 from hhinnant at apple dot com  2006-06-19 18:11 -------
It turns out this still isn't quite right.  Looks like we need:

#define NEEDS_GUARD_P(decl) (TREE_PUBLIC (decl) && (DECL_COMMON (decl) \
                                                    || DECL_ONE_ONLY (decl) \
                                                    || DECL_WEAK (decl) \
                                                    ||
(TARGET_WEAK_NOT_IN_ARCHIVE_TOC \
                                                       && DECL_LANG_SPECIFIC
(decl) \
                                                       &&
(DECL_EXPLICIT_INSTANTIATION (decl) \
                                                       || 
DECL_TEMPLATE_SPECIALIZATION (decl)))))

The former solution was dereferencing a null pointer.


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28017


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread

* [Bug c++/28017] lack of guard variables for explicitly instantiated template static data
  2006-06-13 19:13 [Bug c++/28017] New: " hhinnant at apple dot com
                   ` (7 preceding siblings ...)
  2006-06-13 22:02 ` pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu
@ 2006-06-13 23:28 ` hhinnant at apple dot com
  2006-06-19 18:22 ` hhinnant at apple dot com
                   ` (3 subsequent siblings)
  12 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: hhinnant at apple dot com @ 2006-06-13 23:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: gcc-bugs



------- Comment #9 from hhinnant at apple dot com  2006-06-13 22:02 -------
(In reply to comment #8)

Thanks.  That not only makes sense to me now, but it passes the test. :-)


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28017


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread

* [Bug c++/28017] lack of guard variables for explicitly instantiated template static data
  2006-06-13 19:13 [Bug c++/28017] New: " hhinnant at apple dot com
                   ` (6 preceding siblings ...)
  2006-06-13 21:47 ` hhinnant at apple dot com
@ 2006-06-13 22:02 ` pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu
  2006-06-13 23:28 ` hhinnant at apple dot com
                   ` (4 subsequent siblings)
  12 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu @ 2006-06-13 22:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: gcc-bugs



------- Comment #8 from pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu  2006-06-13 21:47 -------
Subject: Re:  lack of guard variables for explicitly instantiated template
static data

> 
> 
> 
> ------- Comment #7 from hhinnant at apple dot com  2006-06-13 21:41 -------
> (In reply to comment #6)
> > Subject: Re:  lack of guard variables for explicitly instantiated template
> > static data
> > 
> > > #define NEEDS_GUARD_P(decl) (TREE_PUBLIC (decl) && (DECL_COMMON (decl)      \
> > >                                                     || DECL_ONE_ONLY (decl) \
> > >                                                     || DECL_WEAK (decl) \
> > >                                                     ||
> > > (!TARGET_WEAK_NOT_IN_ARCHIVE_TOC \
> > >       || (! DECL_EXPLICIT_INSTANTIATION (decl) \
> > >           && ! DECL_TEMPLATE_SPECIALIZATION (decl)))))
> > > 
> > > ?
> > 
> > The latter.
> 
> Thanks.  But this doesn't pass the test case on darwin.  I'm not familiar
> enough with the C++ FE to understand TARGET_WEAK_NOT_IN_ARCHIVE_TOC.  Could you
> double check the above.  The "!" in front of DECL_EXPLICIT_INSTANTIATION looks
> especially suspicious to me.

You want the opposite of that like:
(TARGET_WEAK_NOT_IN_ARCHIVE_TOC && (DECL_EXPLICIT_INSTANTIATION (decl) ||
DECL_TEMPLATE_SPECIALIZATION (decl)))

I was quoting the case when DECL_WEAK would be set on the decl.
TARGET_WEAK_NOT_IN_ARCHIVE_TOC is only defined to 1 for darwin.  

-- Pinski


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28017


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread

* Re: [Bug c++/28017] lack of guard variables for explicitly instantiated template static data
  2006-06-13 21:47 ` hhinnant at apple dot com
@ 2006-06-13 21:47   ` Andrew Pinski
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: Andrew Pinski @ 2006-06-13 21:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: gcc-bugzilla; +Cc: gcc-bugs

> 
> 
> 
> ------- Comment #7 from hhinnant at apple dot com  2006-06-13 21:41 -------
> (In reply to comment #6)
> > Subject: Re:  lack of guard variables for explicitly instantiated template
> > static data
> > 
> > > #define NEEDS_GUARD_P(decl) (TREE_PUBLIC (decl) && (DECL_COMMON (decl)      \
> > >                                                     || DECL_ONE_ONLY (decl) \
> > >                                                     || DECL_WEAK (decl) \
> > >                                                     ||
> > > (!TARGET_WEAK_NOT_IN_ARCHIVE_TOC \
> > >       || (! DECL_EXPLICIT_INSTANTIATION (decl) \
> > >           && ! DECL_TEMPLATE_SPECIALIZATION (decl)))))
> > > 
> > > ?
> > 
> > The latter.
> 
> Thanks.  But this doesn't pass the test case on darwin.  I'm not familiar
> enough with the C++ FE to understand TARGET_WEAK_NOT_IN_ARCHIVE_TOC.  Could you
> double check the above.  The "!" in front of DECL_EXPLICIT_INSTANTIATION looks
> especially suspicious to me.

You want the opposite of that like:
(TARGET_WEAK_NOT_IN_ARCHIVE_TOC && (DECL_EXPLICIT_INSTANTIATION (decl) || DECL_TEMPLATE_SPECIALIZATION (decl)))

I was quoting the case when DECL_WEAK would be set on the decl.
TARGET_WEAK_NOT_IN_ARCHIVE_TOC is only defined to 1 for darwin.  

-- Pinski


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread

* [Bug c++/28017] lack of guard variables for explicitly instantiated template static data
  2006-06-13 19:13 [Bug c++/28017] New: " hhinnant at apple dot com
                   ` (5 preceding siblings ...)
  2006-06-13 21:41 ` pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu
@ 2006-06-13 21:47 ` hhinnant at apple dot com
  2006-06-13 21:47   ` Andrew Pinski
  2006-06-13 22:02 ` pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu
                   ` (5 subsequent siblings)
  12 siblings, 1 reply; 16+ messages in thread
From: hhinnant at apple dot com @ 2006-06-13 21:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: gcc-bugs



------- Comment #7 from hhinnant at apple dot com  2006-06-13 21:41 -------
(In reply to comment #6)
> Subject: Re:  lack of guard variables for explicitly instantiated template
> static data
> 
> > #define NEEDS_GUARD_P(decl) (TREE_PUBLIC (decl) && (DECL_COMMON (decl)      \
> >                                                     || DECL_ONE_ONLY (decl) \
> >                                                     || DECL_WEAK (decl) \
> >                                                     ||
> > (!TARGET_WEAK_NOT_IN_ARCHIVE_TOC \
> >       || (! DECL_EXPLICIT_INSTANTIATION (decl) \
> >           && ! DECL_TEMPLATE_SPECIALIZATION (decl)))))
> > 
> > ?
> 
> The latter.

Thanks.  But this doesn't pass the test case on darwin.  I'm not familiar
enough with the C++ FE to understand TARGET_WEAK_NOT_IN_ARCHIVE_TOC.  Could you
double check the above.  The "!" in front of DECL_EXPLICIT_INSTANTIATION looks
especially suspicious to me.


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28017


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread

* [Bug c++/28017] lack of guard variables for explicitly instantiated template static data
  2006-06-13 19:13 [Bug c++/28017] New: " hhinnant at apple dot com
                   ` (4 preceding siblings ...)
  2006-06-13 21:24 ` hhinnant at apple dot com
@ 2006-06-13 21:41 ` pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu
  2006-06-13 21:47 ` hhinnant at apple dot com
                   ` (6 subsequent siblings)
  12 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu @ 2006-06-13 21:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: gcc-bugs



------- Comment #6 from pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu  2006-06-13 21:24 -------
Subject: Re:  lack of guard variables for explicitly instantiated template
static data

> #define NEEDS_GUARD_P(decl) (TREE_PUBLIC (decl) && (DECL_COMMON (decl)      \
>                                                     || DECL_ONE_ONLY (decl) \
>                                                     || DECL_WEAK (decl) \
>                                                     ||
> (!TARGET_WEAK_NOT_IN_ARCHIVE_TOC \
>       || (! DECL_EXPLICIT_INSTANTIATION (decl) \
>           && ! DECL_TEMPLATE_SPECIALIZATION (decl)))))
> 
> ?

The latter.

-- Pinski


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28017


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread

* Re: [Bug c++/28017] lack of guard variables for explicitly instantiated template static data
  2006-06-13 21:24 ` hhinnant at apple dot com
@ 2006-06-13 21:25   ` Andrew Pinski
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: Andrew Pinski @ 2006-06-13 21:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: gcc-bugzilla; +Cc: gcc-bugs

> #define NEEDS_GUARD_P(decl) (TREE_PUBLIC (decl) && (DECL_COMMON (decl)      \
>                                                     || DECL_ONE_ONLY (decl) \
>                                                     || DECL_WEAK (decl) \
>                                                     ||
> (!TARGET_WEAK_NOT_IN_ARCHIVE_TOC \
>       || (! DECL_EXPLICIT_INSTANTIATION (decl) \
>           && ! DECL_TEMPLATE_SPECIALIZATION (decl)))))
> 
> ?

The latter.

-- Pinski


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread

* [Bug c++/28017] lack of guard variables for explicitly instantiated template static data
  2006-06-13 19:13 [Bug c++/28017] New: " hhinnant at apple dot com
                   ` (3 preceding siblings ...)
  2006-06-13 19:39 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2006-06-13 21:24 ` hhinnant at apple dot com
  2006-06-13 21:25   ` Andrew Pinski
  2006-06-13 21:41 ` pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu
                   ` (7 subsequent siblings)
  12 siblings, 1 reply; 16+ messages in thread
From: hhinnant at apple dot com @ 2006-06-13 21:24 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: gcc-bugs



------- Comment #5 from hhinnant at apple dot com  2006-06-13 21:23 -------
(In reply to comment #4)
>    For Darwin we do not want explicit instantiations to be
>    linkonce.  */
> 
> 
> This is why this testcase fails on darwin.
> We should instead of just adding DECL_EXPLICIT_INSTANTIATION, check
> TARGET_WEAK_NOT_IN_ARCHIVE_TOC.
> 
> (!TARGET_WEAK_NOT_IN_ARCHIVE_TOC
>       || (! DECL_EXPLICIT_INSTANTIATION (decl)
>           && ! DECL_TEMPLATE_SPECIALIZATION (decl)))
> 
> This is a darwin only issue.

I'm having trouble deciding exactly what you mean.  Is this what you mean:

#define NEEDS_GUARD_P(decl) (!TARGET_WEAK_NOT_IN_ARCHIVE_TOC \
      || (! DECL_EXPLICIT_INSTANTIATION (decl) \
          && ! DECL_TEMPLATE_SPECIALIZATION (decl)))

Or do you mean:

#define NEEDS_GUARD_P(decl) (TREE_PUBLIC (decl) && (DECL_COMMON (decl)      \
                                                    || DECL_ONE_ONLY (decl) \
                                                    || DECL_WEAK (decl) \
                                                    ||
(!TARGET_WEAK_NOT_IN_ARCHIVE_TOC \
      || (! DECL_EXPLICIT_INSTANTIATION (decl) \
          && ! DECL_TEMPLATE_SPECIALIZATION (decl)))))

?


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28017


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread

* [Bug c++/28017] lack of guard variables for explicitly instantiated template static data
  2006-06-13 19:13 [Bug c++/28017] New: " hhinnant at apple dot com
                   ` (2 preceding siblings ...)
  2006-06-13 19:19 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2006-06-13 19:39 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
  2006-06-13 21:24 ` hhinnant at apple dot com
                   ` (8 subsequent siblings)
  12 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2006-06-13 19:39 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: gcc-bugs



------- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2006-06-13 19:37 -------

   For Darwin we do not want explicit instantiations to be
   linkonce.  */


This is why this testcase fails on darwin.
We should instead of just adding DECL_EXPLICIT_INSTANTIATION, check
TARGET_WEAK_NOT_IN_ARCHIVE_TOC.

(!TARGET_WEAK_NOT_IN_ARCHIVE_TOC
      || (! DECL_EXPLICIT_INSTANTIATION (decl)
          && ! DECL_TEMPLATE_SPECIALIZATION (decl)))

This is a darwin only issue.


-- 

pinskia 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         |2006-06-13 19:37:25
               date|                            |


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28017


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread

* [Bug c++/28017] lack of guard variables for explicitly instantiated template static data
  2006-06-13 19:13 [Bug c++/28017] New: " hhinnant at apple dot com
  2006-06-13 19:15 ` [Bug c++/28017] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
  2006-06-13 19:18 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2006-06-13 19:19 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
  2006-06-13 19:39 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
                   ` (9 subsequent siblings)
  12 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2006-06-13 19:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: gcc-bugs



------- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2006-06-13 19:18 -------
   || DECL_ONE_ONLY (decl) || DECL_WEAK (decl) \

Actually those looks should include what is defined for Darwin.


-- 

pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
   GCC host triplet|darwin ppc                  |
 GCC target triplet|                            |*-darwin


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28017


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread

* [Bug c++/28017] lack of guard variables for explicitly instantiated template static data
  2006-06-13 19:13 [Bug c++/28017] New: " hhinnant at apple dot com
  2006-06-13 19:15 ` [Bug c++/28017] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2006-06-13 19:18 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
  2006-06-13 19:19 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
                   ` (10 subsequent siblings)
  12 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2006-06-13 19:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: gcc-bugs



------- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2006-06-13 19:15 -------
(In reply to comment #1)
> This works on x86-linux-gnu on the mainline.

Oh and in 3.3.3.


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28017


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread

* [Bug c++/28017] lack of guard variables for explicitly instantiated template static data
  2006-06-13 19:13 [Bug c++/28017] New: " hhinnant at apple dot com
@ 2006-06-13 19:15 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
  2006-06-13 19:18 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
                   ` (11 subsequent siblings)
  12 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2006-06-13 19:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: gcc-bugs



------- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2006-06-13 19:14 -------
This works on x86-linux-gnu on the mainline.


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28017


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2024-04-03 23:13 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 16+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
     [not found] <bug-28017-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
2024-04-03 23:13 ` [Bug c++/28017] lack of guard variables for explicitly instantiated template static data pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2006-06-13 19:13 [Bug c++/28017] New: " hhinnant at apple dot com
2006-06-13 19:15 ` [Bug c++/28017] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2006-06-13 19:18 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2006-06-13 19:19 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2006-06-13 19:39 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2006-06-13 21:24 ` hhinnant at apple dot com
2006-06-13 21:25   ` Andrew Pinski
2006-06-13 21:41 ` pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu
2006-06-13 21:47 ` hhinnant at apple dot com
2006-06-13 21:47   ` Andrew Pinski
2006-06-13 22:02 ` pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu
2006-06-13 23:28 ` hhinnant at apple dot com
2006-06-19 18:22 ` hhinnant at apple dot com
2006-06-21  5:05 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2006-06-21  5:08 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2009-01-27 17:26 ` bkoz 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).