Re: c++/8889: g++ 3.2.1 (also 3.2 it) miscompile Qt

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

The following reply was made to PR c++/8889; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: Wolfgang Bangerth <bangerth@ticam.utexas.edu>
To: gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org
Cc:  
Subject: Re: c++/8889: g++ 3.2.1 (also 3.2 it) miscompile Qt
Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 17:16:12 -0600 (CST)

 ---------- Forwarded message ----------
 Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 00:11:38 +0100
 From: Felix von Leitner <felix-gcc@fefe.de>
 To: Wolfgang Bangerth <bangerth@ticam.utexas.edu>
 Subject: Re: c++/8889: g++ 3.2.1 (also 3.2 it) miscompile Qt
 
 Wolfgang,
 
 I find it highly insulting that you are now trying ot threaten me in
 this childish way.  If you think it is too much to ask of THE GNU
 COMPILER to expect it to properly compile THE GNU LIBC using THE GNU
 BINUTILS, then it's good to hear now and I will switch to Windows.  At
 least they don't try to bullshit me like this.
 
 In case you really didn't notice: I gave you _all_ of the information I
 have.  I told you the binutils version, the gcc version, the glibc
 version, and the qt version, and I gave the the CFLAGS I used.
 
 And now you tell me it's too much to ask that you at least try to
 reproduce the problem?  Instead you give me vague conspiracy theories
 about potential third party C++ libraries I might use (which, by the
 way, is not the case, as I also wrote in the email).  So if you feel I
 am withholding information, I can't help you.
 
 I manage quite a few open source projects myself.  One of them is a
 libc.  I wouldn't be bothering you if I hadn't exhausted the other
 options.  If trying to reproduce a reported is too much to ask, then
 please get out of the way and let people handle this who are willing to
 invest the necessary time.
 
 > I'm not telling you anything except for this: gcc is in most part a 
 > volunteer project.
 
 No, really?
 I didn't know!
 Now _that_ changes everything!
 Of course then you don't have to try to reproduce problems... ?!  What
 the hell are you smoking there?
 
 > Nobody's paying me for the work, and you can't force me to do
 > something.
 
 Why do you waste my time with this?
 Stop whining and do something useful.
 If it ain't for gcc, then do something else useful.
 
 > If you don't want to cooperate and try to provide more information,
 > that's fine with me, but don't insult me.
 
 ROTFL.  So I insulted you.  I think I start to understand why so many
 Americans need therapy.
 
 > It's not reasonable to ask me to build Qt+KDE with a new compiler just to 
 > experience "that it does not work".
 
 That's why I only asked you to build Qt and xca, which is about 1/4 the
 efford.  You didn't even build gcc and Qt yourself.  What makes you
 think you are even qualified to debug this?
 
 > We need more information to figure out what goes wrong.
 
 No, you don't.
 Just build Qt and xca, start it, and see if it segfaults within the
 first second for no apparent reason.
 
 > I leave this report in feedback state.
 
 Good.
 
 Felix