From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 26496 invoked by alias); 14 May 2003 06:26:00 -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 26471 invoked by uid 71); 14 May 2003 06:26:00 -0000 Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 06:26:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20030514062600.26470.qmail@sources.redhat.com> To: nobody@gcc.gnu.org Cc: gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org, From: Dara Hazeghi Subject: Re: optimization/10772: Result differences between debug and optmize libs on linux; and with sol/nt on optimize mode Reply-To: Dara Hazeghi X-SW-Source: 2003-05/txt/msg01539.txt.bz2 List-Id: The following reply was made to PR optimization/10772; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Dara Hazeghi To: gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org, nobody@gcc.gnu.org, omarbeo@hotmail.com Cc: Subject: Re: optimization/10772: Result differences between debug and optmize libs on linux; and with sol/nt on optimize mode Date: Tue, 13 May 2003 23:16:14 -0700 http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/gnatsweb.pl?cmd=view%20audit- trail&database=gcc&pr=10772 Hello, you're attachment didn't make it with the bug report. Further, you're going to have a more complete description of your problem: "this didn't work" isn't specific enough. You need to include a complete self-contained test-case, along with the exact options you're using to compile it and the exact output you're getting. Without these, it's going to be very difficult if not impossible to determine what's going wrong. So can you please followup with the necessary information for this report? Thanks, Dara