From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 16541 invoked by alias); 5 Nov 2002 17:06:02 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-prs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-prs-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 16526 invoked by uid 71); 5 Nov 2002 17:06:01 -0000 Date: Tue, 05 Nov 2002 09:06:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20021105170601.16525.qmail@sources.redhat.com> To: nobody@gcc.gnu.org Cc: gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org, From: Phil Edwards Subject: Re: c/2678: gcc/g++ should stick compilation options into the .o file Reply-To: Phil Edwards X-SW-Source: 2002-11/txt/msg00235.txt.bz2 List-Id: The following reply was made to PR c/2678; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Phil Edwards To: Wolfgang Bangerth Cc: rfg@monkeys.com, gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: c/2678: gcc/g++ should stick compilation options into the .o file Date: Tue, 5 Nov 2002 12:04:51 -0500 [ note that the pedwards address is now invalid ] On Tue, Nov 05, 2002 at 09:41:10AM -0600, Wolfgang Bangerth wrote: > Phil, Ronald, > you two have been writing a _lot_ of text about this report, but from > reading two sentences every second page, I was not clear about whether > anything has been implemented at all. What's the status of this report? > > I'm just trying to sift through the old reports and try to close that are > no longer valid. 1800+ non-closed reports is simply getting too many... It should be suspended, not closed. The idea is a good one, but I don't have time right now to actively work on it. Phil -- I would therefore like to posit that computing's central challenge, viz. "How not to make a mess of it," has /not/ been met. - Edsger Dijkstra, 1930-2002