From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 14885 invoked by alias); 6 Nov 2002 22:56:02 -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 14871 invoked by uid 71); 6 Nov 2002 22:56:02 -0000 Date: Wed, 06 Nov 2002 14:56:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20021106225602.14870.qmail@sources.redhat.com> To: nobody@gcc.gnu.org Cc: gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org, From: Wolfgang Bangerth Subject: Re: libstdc++/3195: STL warning on Solaris with GCC 3.0 Reply-To: Wolfgang Bangerth X-SW-Source: 2002-11/txt/msg00338.txt.bz2 List-Id: The following reply was made to PR libstdc++/3195; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Wolfgang Bangerth To: Phil Edwards , Bruce Korb , Cc: bangerth@dealii.org, , , Subject: Re: libstdc++/3195: STL warning on Solaris with GCC 3.0 Date: Wed, 6 Nov 2002 16:58:16 -0600 (CST) > > State-Changed-Why: > > This has recently been fixed with some fixinclude hacks, as > > far as I know. > > They were proposed and discussed, but were any of them approved and checked > in? I don't see anything obvious in gcc/ChangeLog. Doh. I was referring to the message Gerald sent here: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2002-10/msg01414.html and even looked into the inclhack.def file and found something on PTHREAD_MUTEX_INITIALIZER there, so was under the impression that they must have fixed it. But you're right, the thing that is in there is older. I'll re-open/re-suspend the report, sorry for the noise (this is not a good day, generating too much noise today :-( ). In any case, Gerald, Bruce, what's the state of the matter? Regards Wolfgang ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Wolfgang Bangerth email: bangerth@ticam.utexas.edu www: http://www.ticam.utexas.edu/~bangerth