From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 18296 invoked by alias); 10 Mar 2003 20:56:00 -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 18281 invoked by uid 71); 10 Mar 2003 20:56:00 -0000 Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 20:56:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20030310205600.18280.qmail@sources.redhat.com> To: nobody@gcc.gnu.org Cc: gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org, From: Wolfgang Bangerth Subject: Re: c/7543: Suggest new warning message for gcc Reply-To: Wolfgang Bangerth X-SW-Source: 2003-03/txt/msg00501.txt.bz2 List-Id: The following reply was made to PR c/7543; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Wolfgang Bangerth To: gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org Cc: Subject: Re: c/7543: Suggest new warning message for gcc Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 14:46:47 -0600 (CST) ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2003 11:43:55 -0500 (EST) From: Tom Truscott To: bangerth@dealii.org Subject: Re: c/7543: Suggest new warning message for gcc > Tom, did your patch get applied to CVS? What's the state of > this? I don't know if it was applied, but I strongly doubt it. The state of this is totally defunct. I have tried different request strategies for a few years and have concluded that only if I become a gcc insider can I get even the simplest changes made. I don't have the time, energy, or interest in that. I'm content with the dozens of a warnings I've added to my personal copy of gcc, which I run daily to spot problems in my company's product (20M+ LOC). If there is a gcc insider who would like to shepherd specific warning changes I will be happy to supply them. Beyond that I'm not interested, not even in discussing this, so feel to mark this bug NOFIX or whatever. Thanks, Tom Truscott