1 |
Hamish Greig [mailto:hgreig@×××××××××××.au] |
2 |
> I think the reason no-one responds to your posts are because |
3 |
> they are not structured in any methodical way. No sequence |
4 |
> showing how you've already tried to investigate the problem, |
5 |
> just a post asking for an answer, which doesn't get a lot of |
6 |
> respect from people who've taken time and effort to learn |
7 |
> things already. |
8 |
|
9 |
I'm sorry that my terseness offends your sensibilities. All |
10 |
the information that I had available was in the post, i.e., |
11 |
gcc failed to build. |
12 |
|
13 |
> What more than this dump can you tell us about this error? |
14 |
|
15 |
it's reproducable. it's not caused by OOM, but obviously by |
16 |
a build-level error, because certain objects that the source |
17 |
code thinks should be available, aren't. Perhaps looking at |
18 |
the detail I provided a bit closer might reveal that fact, in |
19 |
an obvious sort of manner (i.e., an ld error) |
20 |
|
21 |
> What have you already done to investigate it? what level of |
22 |
> skill do you have in this area? are we expected to fix it for |
23 |
> you step by step or to guide you to a resolution? |
24 |
|
25 |
Since I'm neither a maintainer, nor a GCC developer, but simply |
26 |
a gentoo-sparc user, my job is to report the bugs that I see. |
27 |
|
28 |
If you are a developer or maintainer, one might questions the |
29 |
validity in your stance of attacking users for not providing |
30 |
the information that -you- feel is needed, instead of simply |
31 |
asking for additional detail. |
32 |
|
33 |
It's no wonder the list is dry and gentoo is losing it's path. |
34 |
-- |
35 |
gentoo-sparc@l.g.o mailing list |