Re: bootstrap/6680: [alphaev5-dec-osf5.0] gcc-3.1 build fails with internal error

[Wolfgang Bangerth <bangerth@ticam.utexas.edu>]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1645 bytes --]

The following reply was made to PR bootstrap/6680; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: Wolfgang Bangerth <bangerth@ticam.utexas.edu>
To: gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org
Cc:  
Subject: Re: bootstrap/6680: [alphaev5-dec-osf5.0] gcc-3.1 build fails with
 internal error
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2002 15:37:24 -0600 (CST)

 The following mail caused me to close all the duplicates listed below, 
 except 6680. For the record, I send this mail to the audit trail of 6680.
 W.
 
 ---------- Forwarded message ----------
 Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2002 10:54:36 +0100
 From: Emmanuel Thomé <thome@lix.polytechnique.fr>
 To: Wolfgang Bangerth <bangerth@ticam.utexas.edu>
 Subject: Re: ICE/bootstrap alpha*-dec-osf5.0
 
 
 OK, I'll contact the persons you mention.
 
 > > P.S: Perhaps most if not all of these PR's could be collapsed to a
 > > single one ?
 > > [...]
 > 
 > Oh yes, I would be happy to do this. Can you indicate which of these I can 
 > close and which other report I should reference in the closing message? 
 > The bug database has become so large that it has become nearly unusable, 
 > and it is really necessary to reduce same cases to only one 
 > representative.
 
 Then I'm 100% sure that PRs # 6680, 6766, 7509, 7626, 7747, 7777, 8452, 6796
 are duplicates of the same bug. The six other PRs I mention in my mail
 might be related to the same issue, but that's unclear.
 
 So this makes for 8 PRs that you can collapse into a single one ! None
 of them is significantly more accurate than the others, so picking a
 random one would do. Perhaps the one PR that you keep should include a
 reference to the ones that have been closed.
 
 Greetings,
 
 E.