From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-359111-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 32093 invoked by alias); 8 Jun 2011 13:40:07 -0000
Received: (qmail 32080 invoked by uid 22791); 8 Jun 2011 13:40:06 -0000
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.7 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; Wed, 08 Jun 2011 13:39:48 +0000
From: "janus at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug fortran/47601] [OOP] Internal Error: mio_component_ref(): Component not found
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: fortran
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: janus at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: RESOLVED
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: janus at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields:
Message-ID: <bug-47601-4-TNAUxnI3qL@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-47601-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-47601-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Wed, 08 Jun 2011 13:40:00 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
X-SW-Source: 2011-06/txt/msg00637.txt.bz2

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47601

--- Comment #30 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-06-08 13:39:42 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #29)
> Will this fix be applied to 4.6 or 4.5?

Usually we only backport regression fixes, and since this is technically not a
regression, the default procedure would be to *not* backport it to earlier
releases.

However, if your life depends on it, we could maybe consider having an
exception from that rule and doing a backport to the 4.6 branch (which is still
young), given that the patch is relatively small and simple.

Doing a backport to 4.5 is probably not worth it, though. 4.5 has only very
rudimentary support for CLASSes and polymorphism, and I would not expect anyone
to seriously use it for larger OOP codes ...