Re: should bugs really be closed?

To: "Nikita V. Youshchenko" <yoush@cs.msu.su>
Cc: debian-gcc@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: should bugs really be closed?
From: "Martin v. Löwis" <martin@v.loewis.de>
Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2003 23:30:13 +0200
Message-id: <[🔎] 3F26E765.4090702@v.loewis.de>
In-reply-to: <[🔎] 200307300007.38686@sercond.localdomain>
References: <[🔎] 1432287.0Eg2Hm7ach@zigzag.cs.msu.su> <[🔎] m3d6ftcdzb.fsf@mira.informatik.hu-berlin.de> <[🔎] 200307300007.38686@sercond.localdomain>

Nikita V. Youshchenko wrote:

gcc 3.3 is an update for gcc 3.2, so it fixes bugs reported in gcc.



But what about bugs reported on gcc-3.2?


Why is the answer to that question of any relevance for Debian?

Regards,
Martin

Reply to:

References:
- should bugs really be closed?
  - From: "Nikita V. Youshchenko" <yoush@cs.msu.su>
- Re: should bugs really be closed?
  - From: martin@v.loewis.de (Martin v. Löwis)
- Re: should bugs really be closed?
  - From: "Nikita V. Youshchenko" <yoush@cs.msu.su>

Prev by Date: Bug#154525: marked as done (g++-3.0: c++ symlink and alternatives are not created when installing)
Next by Date: [Bug target/11716] [mips] branch out of range when building fold-const.c
Previous by thread: Re: should bugs really be closed?
Next by thread: Processed: sumitter 203317
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread