--- Comment #1 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-04-23 21:24
---
Fixing.
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo
--- Comment #10 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-04-23 16:49
---
> Eric, fold only does it for constant C1 and C2 in "a >= C1 && a <= C2", not
> for
> variable C1 and C2.
Yes, but this fools VRP the same way.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39870
--- Comment #5 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-04-23 15:54
---
> The problem is that this is such a common idiom that it will affect many
> programs.
Even worse: the folder synthesizes the problematic form from the original one.
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu d
--- Comment #1 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-04-22 15:27
---
Caused by
2009-04-21 Martin Jambor
* tree-switch-conversion.c (build_constructors): Split a long line.
(constructor_contains_same_values_p): New function.
(build_one_array): Create
--- Comment #1 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-04-18 15:17
---
Same on Solaris.
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #35 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-04-16 09:13
---
> Ok, so we _do_ run lower_eh_constructs, but
>
> formal = p__proc_next (formal);
>
> returns false for stmt_could_throw_p (stmt). Why? (Not that I can follow
> the Ada testcase ... but I
--- Comment #31 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-04-16 08:33
---
> Do you happen to have a testcase?
Attached in the PR.
:
formal_24(ab) = p__proc_next (formal_6(ab));
goto ;
# formal_7(ab) = PHI
the reaching SSA_NAME on the abnormal edge is wrong. This bre
--- Comment #29 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-04-16 07:57
---
Richard,
the removal of
/* If the RHS of the MODIFY_EXPR may throw or make a nonlocal goto
and the LHS is a user variable, then we need to introduce a formal
temporary. This way the optimizers can
--- Comment #28 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-04-16 07:33
---
Created an attachment (id=17646)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=17646&action=view)
Reduced testcase.
To be gnatchop-ed and compiled at -O.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_
--- Comment #1 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-04-12 09:31
---
Because it overruns the stack (ulimit -s).
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #24 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-04-09 08:07
---
> Would that be what "we" refer to as "hpux-ia64" ?
No, IA-64 and PA-RISC are different things.
> "GNAT Pro is the natural Ada solution for HPs Alpha server and Integrity
--- Comment #7 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-04-07 13:38
---
> Thanks a lot , Is there any workaround for this problem,Becouse SunCC compiler
> is paid.
You need to read the documentation of the software you're trying to build and
see whether GCC is suppo
--- Comment #5 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-04-07 13:29
---
> There should not be any difference as i directed cc to gcc
Your bug. The Makefile expects Sun CC since it uses Sun CC options. So you
need to use Sun CC.
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org chan
--- Comment #3 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-04-07 10:42
---
> Please help me in solving this issue also...
Your Makefile expects Sun CC and you're using GCC.
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #1 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-04-07 10:08
---
> also try to compile by gcc comman ... the famous hello word program..
> $ gcc -c -Wall -D_GNU_SOURCE abhi.c -o abhi.o
> $ gcc -c abhi.o abhi.c
> gcc: abhi.o: linker input file unused because link
--- Comment #21 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-04-07 05:13
---
> It looks like this would affect: hpux-ia64, lynxos-ppc, lynxos-x86,
> vxworks-arm, vxworks-m68k, vxworks-mips, vxworks-sparcv9 and vxworks-x86
> with the "default" ./configure _AND_ every ot
--- Comment #18 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-04-05 21:43
---
> Is there a supported platform currently using FE SJLJ?
Windows.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39625
--- Comment #12 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-04-05 18:26
---
> As for the backend issue, may be it will show up on i386-unknown-freebsd too
> (a
> primary platform), and there's a gcc/ada/system-freebsd-x86.ads in the FSF
> tree.
Most probably not,
--- Comment #9 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-04-05 17:55
---
> Using the BSD Ports I was able to build Ada, up until revision < 145338 .
> While I do not use Ada it would be unfortunate to lose this Language.
This language is not supported in the FSF tree on Ope
--- Comment #1 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-04-04 19:48
---
Too late. :-)
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-04-04 17:44
---
The Ada compiler hasn't been ported to OpenBSD yet.
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |
--- Comment #7 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-04-01 20:51
---
Thanks for the reduced testcase.
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #6 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-04-01 20:48
---
Subject: Bug 39588
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Wed Apr 1 20:48:33 2009
New Revision: 145432
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=145432
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/39588
* c
--- Comment #5 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-04-01 20:47
---
Subject: Bug 39588
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Wed Apr 1 20:47:37 2009
New Revision: 145431
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=145431
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/39588
* c
--- Comment #4 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-04-01 20:46
---
Subject: Bug 39588
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Wed Apr 1 20:46:30 2009
New Revision: 145430
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=145430
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/39588
* c
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot
|dot org
--- Comment #7 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-03-23 11:47
---
> I'd like to see this message, which is on by default, for the change
> introduced in r132614. I haven't figured out how to determine if the offset
> for a field has changed, just the alignme
--- Comment #6 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-03-23 11:25
---
> Did behavior change if you remove the aligned (2) attribute from d?
No, it didn't change without the attribute, it was and still is (10, 12).
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39514
--- Comment #4 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-03-18 22:24
---
Please post the failure message when you report failures.
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #10 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-03-18 18:54
---
Subject: Bug 35180
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Wed Mar 18 18:54:31 2009
New Revision: 144942
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=144942
Log:
PR target/35180
* conf
--- Comment #7 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-03-18 16:56
---
> OK. I decided to look at this in more detail in the simulator. The failing
> instruction is:
>
> 2001358: d0 07 bf fc ld [ %fp + -4 ], %o0
>
> and when I run with a breakpoin
--- Comment #4 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-03-17 21:22
---
* cp/method.c (use_thunk): Change is_thunk from crtl to cfun.
in ChangeLog is incorrect. It should be
* method.c (use_thunk): Change is_thunk from crtl to cfun.
in cp/ChangeLog.
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot
--- Comment #5 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-03-13 09:35
---
Works fine now, thanks for the quick turn around!
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-03-12 18:43
---
> How can I reproduce it?
-mtune=i586 presumably.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39445
SSE2 tests
Product: gcc
Version: 4.4.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: wrong-code
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu
--- Comment #7 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-03-11 10:25
---
> I thought that the now what as with your patch. So it looks indeed like quite
> similar to what I see. I'll try to see why it doesn't solve my case.
Reverting to the old canonicalization at t
--- Comment #5 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-03-11 09:36
---
> Thanks, I tried your patch against a 4.3.3 base but it didn't fix the problem,
> your patch canonicalizes while what I need is a distribution
Read again the RTL expander hunk.
--
http://
--- Comment #3 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-03-11 09:06
---
See http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2008-12/msg01134.html
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
Known
--- Comment #4 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-03-08 10:03
---
*** Bug 25819 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #10 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-03-08 10:03
---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 39221 ***
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #7 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-03-08 09:54
---
The testcase compiles with -gnat95.
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |minor
Summary|gcc Ada doesn't handle |ad
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |minor
Summary|gcc Ada does not handle |fixed point
--- Comment #4 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-03-08 09:46
---
What happened to the patch?
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-03-08 09:38
---
A workaround is to remove -gnatE.
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #9 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-03-08 09:21
---
Patches must be submitted on gcc-patches@
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-03-08 09:18
---
The stack must be executable because of trampolines.
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-03-08 09:12
---
No feedback in 3 months.
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #11 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-03-08 09:11
---
No feedback 3 years.
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-03-08 09:09
---
No feedback in 3 months.
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-03-08 09:04
---
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2009-02/msg00594.html
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-03-08 09:02
---
The branch is (virtually) closed.
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot
--- Comment #3 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-03-05 13:31
---
> No, the case is an extension to C. 6.5.3.4 was obviously written without this
> case in mind.
Not at all, see 6.7.2.1 (16):
16 As a special case, the last element of a structure with more than one
--- Comment #1 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-03-05 13:06
---
> Currently sizeof(f1) == sizeof(int) rather than 4*sizeof(int), i.e.
> sizeof the object is determined by the type only, not the actual object
> size taking into account its initializer.
That's
--- Comment #4 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-03-02 18:42
---
I'm seeing it on an ACATS test as well (with local compiler modifications).
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |
--- Comment #7 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-03-01 10:56
---
The test should pass everywhere now.
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #6 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-03-01 10:53
---
Subject: Bug 39264
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Sun Mar 1 10:53:17 2009
New Revision: 144514
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=144514
Log:
PR ada/39264
* gcc-interfac
--- Comment #4 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-03-01 08:07
---
> There is a bug in the gcc compiler for the C code that changes the behavior of
> a simple program with -O2 optimizations, but not with -O1 or -O0.
-O2 enables -fstrict-aliasing so the code must be writ
--- Comment #3 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-02-28 11:38
---
Is there a 64-bit GDB around on the machine?
ebotca...@gcc40:~$ gdb pack3
GNU gdb 6.4.90-debian
Copyright (C) 2006 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
GDB is free software, covered by the GNU General Public License
--- Comment #25 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-02-26 08:26
---
> Also, you can have the same problem with this kind of code without threads.
> Imagine, for example, if the 'shared_variable' may be in read-only memory and
> 'can_write' indicate
--- Comment #6 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-02-26 08:16
---
*** Bug 39306 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-02-26 08:16
---
> fstack-check is known to be broken on x86 GNU/Linux, see PR 13757.
Yes, the current implementation is non-functional on x86{-64}/Linux.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 13
--- Comment #2 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-02-23 14:43
---
Investigating.
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-02-23 14:43
---
Visible on s390x as well:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2009-02/msg02251.html
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #26 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-02-18 22:11
---
> Fixed. The C++ static/extern issue has been added as PR 39236.
You have installed a lot more things than what's described in the ChangeLog.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39179
--- Comment #13 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-02-18 14:51
---
Created an attachment (id=17325)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=17325&action=view)
Ada testcase
(botca...@red) ~ $ gcc -S p.ads
p.ads:16: note: The ABI of passing union with long dou
--- Comment #12 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-02-18 14:38
---
> I believe that warning is turned on for C ObjC C++ ObjC++ only.
Wrong.
spgn_numerics.ads: In function 'Test_Gip_Stat':
spgn_numerics.ads:25: note: The ABI of passing union with long double has
c
--- Comment #10 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-02-18 09:51
---
Please make sure the warning is issued only for appropriate languages (it is
not
needed in Ada for example and the wording doesn't make sense). TIA.
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org ch
--- Comment #15 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-02-17 18:56
---
TREE_STATIC && DECL_EXTERNAL doesn't make sense for a VAR_DECL as per tree.h:
/* In a VAR_DECL, nonzero means allocate static storage.
#define TREE_STATIC(NODE) ((NODE)->base.static_flag)
*
--- Comment #3 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-02-14 17:16
---
> The problem is that targetm.binds_local_p returns true for
>
> type size
> unit size
> align 32 symtab 0 alias set -1 canonical type 0xb785edd0 precisio
--- Comment #5 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-02-12 11:40
---
> Even for code with lots of computed gotos, the CFG should not be fully
> connected. We factorize computed gotos to avoid exactly that. At least we
> used
> to. Maybe the factorizing is brok
--- Comment #18 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-02-09 11:11
---
Thanks for reporting the problem.
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #17 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-02-09 11:09
---
Subject: Bug 38981
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Mon Feb 9 11:09:25 2009
New Revision: 144032
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=144032
Log:
PR middle-end/38981
*
--- Comment #16 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-02-08 17:59
---
Still present on SPARC 32-bit on the mainline:
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/pr38819.c execution, -O2
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/pr38819.c execution, -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|major |normal
Summary|Unaligned memory access with|unaligned
--- Comment #2 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-02-08 13:01
---
Investigating.
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-02-08 13:01
---
Reproducible with every compiler I tried...
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #16 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-02-08 12:33
---
Recategorizing.
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #15 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-02-08 10:58
---
> This is a bug in the qsort implementation on Solaris 8:
Browsing the Sun database shows several related tickets, but most have been
closed as "not a defect" on the ground that the comparator func
--- Comment #14 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-02-08 10:26
---
This is a bug in the qsort implementation on Solaris 8:
Breakpoint 1, sort_coalesce_list (cl=0x1ce4b80)
at /nile.build/botcazou/gcc-head/src/gcc/tree-ssa-coalesce.c:434
434 qsort (cl->sorted,
--- Comment #13 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-02-08 10:11
---
Btw, the default extension for preprocessed sources is .i, just pass
-save-temps
to the compiler to get the file.
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #12 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-02-08 10:09
---
Confirmed on Solaris 8, but neither on Solaris 9 nor on Solaris 10.
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-29 14:37
---
> RTEMS has fixed size task stacks. This test is blowing a stack that is ~100K
> large. How large does it need to be? Is is a bug to use this much stack?
It's a QOI issue, the stack usage is alr
--- Comment #14 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-25 18:02
---
> Do we have a testcase for a primary platform that is affected by this bug?
FWIW I haven't seen this failure mode on the SPARC yet.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38740
--- Comment #5 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-10 22:06
---
> I don't know how I can test this file alone without regtesting all gcc (I
> tried: make -k check-gcc RUNTESTFLAGS="dg.exp=graphite/block-3.c" without
> success).
Try make -
--- Comment #1 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-07 10:11
---
Fallout of the change made for PR middle-end/23294 in GCC 4.2.
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #20 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-07 06:34
---
> Most "interesting" libcalls for x86 -m32 probably are the DImode ones, and if
> subreg lowering does this for all arguments, we would have to update the
> REG_REP notes in the CALL_INSN,
--- Comment #4 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-06 13:27
---
Please fill in the "known to work" field if you can.
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #3 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-06 13:24
---
I've seen that on the SPARC too. Does Richard's patch in
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-12/msg00506.html
help? If so, it is approved for mainline and 4.3 branch.
--
ebotcazou at gcc d
--- Comment #4 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-06 12:57
---
Bootstrapping GNAT with a more recent GNAT is not supported.
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #4 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-21 17:12
---
> auto-host.h must exist when those files were compiled. I guess
> it was generated more than once.
My understanding is that it is re-generated at each stage:
auto-host.h: cstamp-h ; @true
cstamp-h: con
--- Comment #2 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-21 16:07
---
> What are the differences?
This is explained in the message.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38591
: bootstrap
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38591
--- Comment #13 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-20 22:33
---
Subject: Bug 37610
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Sat Dec 20 22:32:30 2008
New Revision: 142850
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=142850
Log:
PR target/37610
* conf
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |major
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38495
501 - 600 of 2634 matches
Mail list logo
