From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID, REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,978f50245fc02645 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: Tom Moran Subject: Re: Root of a GNAT problem (was: Gnat v3.05 bug or compilation problem Date: 1996/12/11 Message-ID: <32AF4E35.5AD7@bix.com>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 203634655 references: <58h301$gad@alfali.enst-bretagne.fr> <58h6n2$2hbi@info4.rus.uni-stuttgart.de> <32AD9D35.4D1@lmtas.lmco.com> <32AE0EDC.4D4B@bix.com> <1996Dec11.071027.1@eisner> <32AF3173.F75@watson.ibm.com> content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii organization: InterNex Information Services 1-800-595-3333 mime-version: 1.0 reply-to: tmoran@bix.com newsgroups: comp.lang.ada x-mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; I) Date: 1996-12-11T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: > chat@gnat.com to post messages) specifically for GNAT users. That is a > far more appropriate forum than c.l.a for posting reports of possible > bugs. Is there an easy way to scan back through listerver messages for a topic? That's why I said c.l.a. instead of chat@gnat.com, which I agree is much more appropriate. But the tools appear more convenient for newsgroups.