Re: other/9243: gcc -v does not show how the compiler was configured (patch ping)

Re: other/9243: gcc -v does not show how the compiler was configured (patch ping)

[Alexandre Oliva]

The following reply was made to PR other/9243; it has been noted by GNATS.

>From aoliva@redhat.com  Mon Jan 13 00:46:34 2003
From: Alexandre Oliva <aoliva@redhat.com>
To: neroden@twcny.rr.com
Cc: gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org,
   reichelt@igpm.rwth-aachen.de, gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org, nobody@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: other/9243: gcc -v does not show how the compiler was configured (patch ping)
Date: 09 Jan 2003 18:10:18 -0200

 On Jan  9, 2003, Nathanael Nerode <neroden@twcny.rr.com> wrote:
 
 > This will be fixed as soon as the following patch is approved:
 > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2002-12/msg01409.html
 
 > Alex, you may have thought you approved this, but you actually didn't. :-)
 
 Oops, sorry.  Please make it double quotes instead of single quotes
 (such that we don't break autoconf's single-quoting of arguments
 containing whitespace) and put it in.  Thanks,
 
 -- 
 Alexandre Oliva   Enjoy Guarana', see http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
 Red Hat GCC Developer                 aoliva@{redhat.com, gcc.gnu.org}
 CS PhD student at IC-Unicamp        oliva@{lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org}
 Free Software Evangelist                Professional serial bug killer

Re: other/9243: gcc -v does not show how the compiler was configured (patch ping)

[Nathanael Nerode]

The following reply was made to PR other/9243; it has been noted by GNATS.

>From neroden@twcny.rr.com  Mon Jan 13 00:45:07 2003
From: Nathanael Nerode <neroden@twcny.rr.com>
To: gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org,
   reichelt@igpm.rwth-aachen.de, gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org, nobody@gcc.gnu.org,
   aoliva@redhat.com
Cc:  
Subject: Re: other/9243: gcc -v does not show how the compiler was configured (patch ping)
Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2003 11:21:46 -0500

 This will be fixed as soon as the following patch is approved:
 http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2002-12/msg01409.html
 
 Alex, you may have thought you approved this, but you actually didn't. :-)
 
 --Nathanael