From owner-cvs-gnu  Fri Mar 17 18:42:31 1995
Return-Path: cvs-gnu-owner
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) id SAA06100 for cvs-gnu-outgoing; Fri, 17 Mar 1995 18:42:31 -0800
Received: from forgery.CS.Berkeley.EDU (forgery.CS.Berkeley.EDU [128.32.33.75]) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) with ESMTP id SAA06094; Fri, 17 Mar 1995 18:42:30 -0800
Received: (from asami@localhost) by forgery.CS.Berkeley.EDU (8.6.11/8.6.9) id SAA13791; Fri, 17 Mar 1995 18:42:28 -0800
Date: Fri, 17 Mar 1995 18:42:28 -0800
Message-Id: <199503180242.SAA13791@forgery.CS.Berkeley.EDU>
To: nate@freefall.cdrom.com
CC: CVS-commiters@freefall.cdrom.com, cvs-gnu@freefall.cdrom.com
In-reply-to: <199503172124.NAA11094@freefall.cdrom.com> (message from Nate Williams on Fri, 17 Mar 1995 13:24:34 -0800)
Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/gnu/usr.bin/cc/cc1plus pt.c
From: asami@cs.berkeley.edu (Satoshi Asami/=?ISO-2022-JP?B?GyRCQHUbKEI=?= =?ISO-2022-JP?B?GyRCOCsbKEIgGyRCOC0bKEI=?=)
Sender: cvs-gnu-owner@freebsd.org
Precedence: bulk

 *   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