[Bug target/16589] [4.0/4.1/4.2 regression] [m68k] segmentation fault on identical array accesses in the ?: operators' body
--- Comment #18 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-25 02:35 --- Will not be fixed in 4.1.1; adjust target milestone to 4.1.2. -- mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|4.1.1 |4.1.2 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16589
[Bug target/16589] [4.0/4.1/4.2 regression] [m68k] segmentation fault on identical array accesses in the ?: operators' body
--- Comment #17 from kazu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-08 16:00 --- Andreas, are you going to submit your patch? -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16589
[Bug target/16589] [4.0/4.1/4.2 regression] [m68k] segmentation fault on identical array accesses in the ?: operators' body
--- Comment #16 from kazu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-08 15:47 --- Disregard my last comment. The original testcase still fails if I use -fno-trapping-math. The testcase in #3 doesn't fail with or without -fno-trapping-math. -- kazu at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||kazu at gcc dot gnu dot org http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16589
[Bug target/16589] [4.0/4.1/4.2 regression] [m68k] segmentation fault on identical array accesses in the ?: operators' body
--- Comment #15 from kazu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-08 15:41 --- I cannot reproduce the problem even with -O2 -fno-trapping-math. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16589
[Bug target/16589] [4.0/4.1/4.2 regression] [m68k] segmentation fault on identical array accesses in the ?: operators' body
-- mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|4.1.0 |4.1.1 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16589
[Bug target/16589] [4.0/4.1/4.2 regression] [m68k] segmentation fault on identical array accesses in the ?: operators' body
--- Comment #14 from cyberax at elewise dot com 2005-12-11 16:25 --- Created an attachment (id=10451) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=10451&action=view) Test case -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16589