From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 10054 invoked by alias); 29 Sep 2011 16:47:27 -0000 Received: (qmail 10040 invoked by uid 22791); 29 Sep 2011 16:47:24 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.9 required=5.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,AWL,BAYES_00 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, 29 Sep 2011 16:47:10 +0000 From: "LpSolit at netscape dot net" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug c++/39813] [feature request] __PRETTY_FUNCTION__ addition Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2011 16:54:00 -0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: c++ X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: enhancement X-Bugzilla-Who: LpSolit at netscape dot net X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 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: 2011-09/txt/msg02291.txt.bz2 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D39813 --- Comment #7 from Fr=C3=A9d=C3=A9ric Buclin = 2011-09-29 16:46:08 UTC --- Our code doesn't CC gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org by default. This is useless as it already gets bugmails for all bugs in the gcc product thanks to our Bugzilla extension (was so since we upgraded from 2.20 to 3.6.2). If there are some = bugs with gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org in the CC list, then this comes from old hacks GCC Bugzilla 2.20 had before I did the upgrade. You don't have to worry about t= his as it has no effect on getting bugmails. Once we upgrade to Bugzilla 4.2 (this won't happen before several months as= we didn't release 4.2rc1 yet), powerless users won't be allowed to unCC someone else. We enforced this in 4.2 for the exact same reason as described here, = i.e. a user having fun removing another user account from the CC list. If this is critical for overseers, I can backport and apply the patch to GCC Bugzilla.