http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=323
Chung-Ju Wu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jasonwucj at gmail dot com
--
Configure bug
Package: gcc-multilib
Version: 4:4.7.2-1
Severity: important
For some reason I can no longuer use my 32bits schroot system to compile it
fails with:
$ echo "int main(){}" > t.c
$ gcc -v t.c
Using built-in specs.
COLLECT_GCC=gcc
COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/usr/lib/gcc/i486-linux-gnu/4.7/lto-wrapper
Targ
Package: gcc-multilib
Severity: normal
-- System Information:
Debian Release: 7.0
APT prefers unstable
APT policy: (500, 'unstable')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)
Foreign Architectures: i386
Kernel: Linux 3.8-8.towo-siduction-amd64 (SMP w/8 CPU cores; PREEMPT)
Locale: LANG=en_US.utf8, LC_CTYPE
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=323
Ondřej Surý changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ondrej at sury dot org
--- Comment #190 from
JFTR I have already fixed the code upstream.
Feel free to close this bug or better mark it upstream+wontfix, so others not
so versed in upstream bugzilla can find it.
Ondřej Surý
On 26. 4. 2013, at 16:27, Matthias Klose wrote:
> Am 26.04.2013 14:37, schrieb Ondřej Surý:
>> I am lowering the s
Am 26.04.2013 14:37, schrieb Ondřej Surý:
> I am lowering the severity and moving the discussion to gcc bugzilla, ok?
no. this will be resolved upstream as a dup for PR323. please fix your code.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-gcc-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Tro
Am 25.04.2013 23:17, schrieb Ludovic Brenta:
>> Ludovic, seen that the gnat-4.7 and gnat-4.8 uploads did wait in NEW
>> for the last three months, please could you make these available on
>> people.debian.org too?
>
> Done, at last. Sorry for the delay. This build (4.8.0-1~exp2) includes
> your
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> forwarded 706207 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57080
Bug #706207 [gcc-4.6,gcc-4.7] gcc-4.6, gcc-4.7: invalid optimization when doing
double -> int math and conversion (on big endian archs(?))
Set Bug forwarded-to-address to
'http:/
forwarded 706207 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57080
severity 706207 minor
thank you
On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 2:09 PM, Bastian Blank wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 01:04:30PM +0200, Ondřej Surý wrote:
>> I don't object to this, but somehow I fail to grasp the idea that the
>> resul
On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 01:04:30PM +0200, Ondřej Surý wrote:
> I don't object to this, but somehow I fail to grasp the idea that the
> result depends on architecture and optimization level.
There are negative number involved. The result is somewhere within
5.0+-$epsilon depending on order of calcu
On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 12:43 PM, Bastian Blank wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 12:27:53PM +0200, Ondřej Surý wrote:
>> This code from libgd2:src/gd.c:clip_1d:
>> *y1 -= m * (*x1 - mindim);
>> where
>> m = (double) -0.05
>> *x1 = -200
>> mindim = 0
>> *y1 = 15
>> results in *y1 = 4,
On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 12:27:53PM +0200, Ondřej Surý wrote:
> This code from libgd2:src/gd.c:clip_1d:
> *y1 -= m * (*x1 - mindim);
> where
> m = (double) -0.05
> *x1 = -200
> mindim = 0
> *y1 = 15
> results in *y1 = 4, which is incorrect value, since it should be 5.
Nope. The result
Package: gcc-4.6,gcc-4.7
Version: 4.6.3-15
Severity: normal
Dear Maintainer,
this bug manifest itself on ia64, powerpc and s390x where gcc-4.6 is
used and the optmized code (-O2) fails to produce correct math
results.
This code from libgd2:src/gd.c:clip_1d:
*y1 -= m * (*x1 - mindim);
where
13 matches
Mail list logo
