* [Fwd: Delivery Status Notification (Failure)]
@ 2004-01-12 9:32 Nathan Sidwell
2004-01-12 10:07 ` Gerald Pfeifer
2004-01-12 15:30 ` Christopher Faylor
0 siblings, 2 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Nathan Sidwell @ 2004-01-12 9:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: postmaster; +Cc: overseers
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 282 bytes --]
Hi,
I received the attached bounce message for mail I posted to gcc@gcc.gnu.org.
Why are you bouncing list email?
nathan
--
Nathan Sidwell :: http://www.codesourcery.com :: CodeSourcery LLC
nathan@codesourcery.com :: http://www.planetfall.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk
[-- Attachment #2: Delivery Status Notification (Failure) --]
[-- Type: message/rfc822, Size: 5010 bytes --]
[-- Attachment #2.1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 145 bytes --]
This is an automatically generated Delivery Status Notification.
Delivery to the following recipients failed.
gcc@ml-sss.demon.co.uk
[-- Attachment #2.1.2: Type: message/delivery-status, Size: 202 bytes --]
[-- Attachment #2.1.3: Type: message/rfc822, Size: 3469 bytes --]
From: Nathan Sidwell <nathan@codesourcery.com>
To: Steven Bosscher <s.bosscher@student.tudelft.nl>
Cc: Mark Mitchell <mark@codesourcery.com>, Giovanni Bajo <giovannibajo@libero.it>, gcc@gcc.gnu.org, Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr@integrable-solutions.net>
Subject: Re: 3.4 regressions: are 2.95 regressions still actual
Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 09:04:21 +0000
Message-ID: <40026315.7070603@codesourcery.com>
Steven Bosscher wrote:
> On Monday 12 January 2004 06:21, Mark Mitchell wrote:
> But this came up because one such regression (an accepts-illegal bug)
> was found about a week ago, and then targeted for 3.4. Many people
> were trying to reclassify and retarget bugs. Giovanni had set the
> target milestone for this bug to 3.4.0, and I moved it to 3.5 because
> we want Bugzilla to reflect the quality of the compiler, and a bug
> that requires four years to be discovered in a pity but not a reason
> to delay branching 3.4.0. That doesn't suddenly not make it a
> regression -- just one that is not a show stopper for 3.4.0.
>
> Gaby sent a good mail about this , this morning, and I agree with him.
> However, there is a deeper problem here: Many really minor bugs get
> targeted to the first upcoming release so we appear to have many bugs.
> Then you look at the number of bugs and say you will not branch.
The priority field should indicate the importance of the bug. Regressions
should still be targetted at the next scheduled release (until the RM
decides otherwise).
nathan
--
Nathan Sidwell :: http://www.codesourcery.com :: CodeSourcery LLC
nathan@codesourcery.com :: http://www.planetfall.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [Fwd: Delivery Status Notification (Failure)]
2004-01-12 9:32 [Fwd: Delivery Status Notification (Failure)] Nathan Sidwell
@ 2004-01-12 10:07 ` Gerald Pfeifer
2004-01-12 10:08 ` Gerald Pfeifer
2004-01-12 15:30 ` Christopher Faylor
1 sibling, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Gerald Pfeifer @ 2004-01-12 10:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Nathan Sidwell; +Cc: postmaster, overseers
On Mon, 12 Jan 2004, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
> I received the attached bounce message for mail I posted to
> gcc@gcc.gnu.org. Why are you bouncing list email?
It's not us, it's one of our subscribers that is causing these bounces,
and as you are in the From: of the original message, the bounce goes to
you.
Gerald
--
Gerald Pfeifer (Jerry) gerald@pfeifer.com http://www.pfeifer.com/gerald/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [Fwd: Delivery Status Notification (Failure)]
2004-01-12 10:07 ` Gerald Pfeifer
@ 2004-01-12 10:08 ` Gerald Pfeifer
0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Gerald Pfeifer @ 2004-01-12 10:08 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Nathan Sidwell; +Cc: overseers
Sheesh -- I missed that this was addressed to postmaster@${badguy}. :-(
Sorry!
Gerald
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [Fwd: Delivery Status Notification (Failure)]
2004-01-12 9:32 [Fwd: Delivery Status Notification (Failure)] Nathan Sidwell
2004-01-12 10:07 ` Gerald Pfeifer
@ 2004-01-12 15:30 ` Christopher Faylor
1 sibling, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Christopher Faylor @ 2004-01-12 15:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Nathan Sidwell; +Cc: postmaster, overseers
On Mon, Jan 12, 2004 at 09:32:41AM +0000, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
>Hi,
>I received the attached bounce message for mail I posted to gcc@gcc.gnu.org.
>Why are you bouncing list email?
I've removed gcc AT ml-sss.demon.co.uk from the gcc list. You can resubscribe
when the problem is fixed.
>Delivery to the following recipients failed.
>
> gcc AT ml-sss.demon.co.uk
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2004-01-12 15:30 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2004-01-12 9:32 [Fwd: Delivery Status Notification (Failure)] Nathan Sidwell
2004-01-12 10:07 ` Gerald Pfeifer
2004-01-12 10:08 ` Gerald Pfeifer
2004-01-12 15:30 ` Christopher Faylor
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).