Date: Fri, 17 Mar 1995 18:42:28 -0800 From: asami@cs.berkeley.edu (Satoshi Asami/=?ISO-2022-JP?B?GyRCQHUbKEI=?= =?ISO-2022-JP?B?GyRCOCsbKEIgGyRCOC0bKEI=?=) To: nate@freefall.cdrom.com Cc: CVS-commiters@freefall.cdrom.com, cvs-gnu@freefall.cdrom.com Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/gnu/usr.bin/cc/cc1plus pt.c Message-ID: <199503180242.SAA13791@forgery.CS.Berkeley.EDU> In-Reply-To: <199503172124.NAA11094@freefall.cdrom.com> (message from Nate Williams on Fri, 17 Mar 1995 13:24:34 -0800)
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
* Modified: gnu/usr.bin/cc/cc1plus pt.c * Log: * Gcc v2.6.3 currently has a problem with templates. Specifically, with * default switches, template functions get EXTERNAL linkage in each file * in which they occur, causing multiple definition errors during * linking. The enclosed patch (from gnu.g++.bug) appears to solve the * problem (I enclose the accompanying message as well). * * This patch fixes the multiply defined template functions bug * which was introduced in 2.6.1. * * Submitted by: "Justin T. Gibbs" <gibbs@estienne.cs.berkeley.edu> * Obtained from: Jason Merrill at cygnus support on G++ mailing list I've been wondering about this for a while...won't it be easier to read if we put the included message *below* the "Submitted by:" line? It always feel a little strange to read the log, thinking that the committer wrote it but doesn't sound right (like in this case "I enclose the accompanying message as well" part), and then come to the last line saying the text is actually from someone else. Well, just wondering.... Satoshi
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199503180242.SAA13791>