From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 23153 invoked by alias); 25 Mar 2003 17:06:01 -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 23128 invoked by uid 71); 25 Mar 2003 17:06:01 -0000 Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2003 17:06:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20030325170601.23127.qmail@sources.redhat.com> To: ghazi@gcc.gnu.org Cc: gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org, From: Wolfgang Bangerth Subject: Re: other/6955: collect2 says "core dumped" when there is no core Reply-To: Wolfgang Bangerth X-SW-Source: 2003-03/txt/msg01712.txt.bz2 List-Id: The following reply was made to PR other/6955; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Wolfgang Bangerth To: "Kaveh R. Ghazi" Cc: bruno@clisp.org, , , Subject: Re: other/6955: collect2 says "core dumped" when there is no core Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2003 11:00:33 -0600 (CST) > > I _made_ you responsible :-) You weren't in any legal sense, I just looked > > at the output of "cvs annotate" to find out that you were the one who > > checked in the lines of question. > > I hate to be a pedant, but now honor is at stake. :-) Uh, this is getting out of hand -- I just wanted to get someone to review the patch... But then we both live in a country where the end seems to justify the means, so I would say I succeeded and my approach was justified ;-) (No WMD found while searching CVS, though.) And, by the way -- note my ingenious (and mostly unconscious) choice of words: I just said that you "checked in" these lines, not "broke" or "botched up"... > I honestly don't think I introduced this error. Looking back at the > cvs logs, it came in through one of the many infamous gcc2 merges. It > came in over four years ago: "Merge in gcc2 snapshot 19980929". Well, the line we are talking about is collect2.c:1511. This line has time stamp 1999-11-25, CVS version 1.87, which was your commit. Now, I acknowledge that if I had checked more carefully, then I'd have seen that your patch only preserved existing (wrong) behavior, but I haven't found a way to get the equivalent of cvs annotate of past versions to see who really introduced this. At any rate, I take back any non-intended blame, hereby fully rehabilitate your honor and assume all guilt myself. Let the patch go in! (I think it qualifies as "obvious".) Thanks Wolfgang ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Wolfgang Bangerth email: bangerth@ticam.utexas.edu www: http://www.ticam.utexas.edu/~bangerth/