public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "gjl at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug ada/55243] STAMP variable is not defined in t-avr
Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2012 12:18:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <bug-55243-4-w1nFZIghnI@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bug-55243-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55243

--- Comment #22 from Georg-Johann Lay <gjl at gcc dot gnu.org> 2012-12-11 12:18:23 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #21)

What I don't understand is what is bad with Rolf's proposal of defining STAMP?

Stamping is not that unusual in the build process.  Up to now it was not
needed, but is it that critical to set STAMP like proposed above?


  parent reply	other threads:[~2012-12-11 12:18 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 33+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-11-08 21:47 [Bug target/55243] New: " rolf.ebert.gcc at gmx dot de
2012-11-08 21:51 ` [Bug target/55243] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-11-08 22:08 ` rolf.ebert.gcc at gmx dot de
2012-11-11 21:31 ` rolf.ebert.gcc at gmx dot de
2012-11-14  0:00 ` [Bug ada/55243] " gjl at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-11-17 10:03 ` rolf.ebert.gcc at gmx dot de
2012-11-29 14:19 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-12-02 23:17 ` gjl at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-12-03  6:40 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-12-03 13:38 ` gjl at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-12-03 14:35 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-12-10 17:01 ` gjl at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-12-10 18:00 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-12-10 18:02 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-12-10 18:25 ` gjl at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-12-10 18:37 ` gjl at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-12-10 18:47 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-12-10 18:49 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-12-10 20:41 ` gjl at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-12-10 21:18 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-12-10 22:57 ` gjl at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-12-10 23:13 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-12-11 12:18 ` gjl at gcc dot gnu.org [this message]
2012-12-11 19:57 ` rolf.ebert.gcc at gmx dot de
2012-12-12 11:35 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-12-14 18:26 ` gjl at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-12-14 18:32 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-12-16 11:08 ` [Bug target/55243] " ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-12-17 19:25 ` rolf.ebert.gcc at gmx dot de
2012-12-17 22:54 ` gjl at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-12-20 21:45 ` ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org
2013-01-07 13:12 ` gjl at gcc dot gnu.org
2013-01-07 13:16 ` gjl at gcc dot gnu.org

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=bug-55243-4-w1nFZIghnI@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ \
    --to=gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body. 
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).