Bug#711558: PR52306 (was Re: Bug#711558: gcc-4.8: [m68k] patch set 2)

2013-09-01 Thread Thorsten Glaser
Matthias Klose dixit: >I think, setting the flag for the option to 0 as the default, and >applying this for m68k only would be the second best option, provided Right… >that you cannot find out how to implement Mikael's suggestion. … but I think I know, generally, how to do that. (Have been deal

Bug#711558: PR52306 (was Re: Bug#711558: gcc-4.8: [m68k] patch set 2)

2013-08-28 Thread Matthias Klose
Am 23.08.2013 00:26, schrieb Thorsten Glaser: > Matthias Klose dixit: > >> yes, I do reject this. > > I see. Would you please… > >>> “for the time being”? If so, would you accept a patch >>> that just disables -fauto-inc-dec on m68k *always*, >>> even in the cases where it doesn’t ICE? (one-line

Bug#711558: PR52306 (was Re: Bug#711558: gcc-4.8: [m68k] patch set 2)

2013-08-23 Thread Mikael Pettersson
On Thu, 22 Aug 2013 22:26:51 + (UTC), Thorsten Glaser wrote: > Matthias Klose dixit: > > >yes, I do reject this. > > I see. Would you please=E2=80=A6 > > >> =E2=80=9Cfor the time being=E2=80=9D? If so, would you accept a patch > >> that just disables -fauto-inc-dec on m68k *always*, > >> e

Bug#711558: PR52306 (was Re: Bug#711558: gcc-4.8: [m68k] patch set 2)

2013-08-22 Thread Thorsten Glaser
Matthias Klose dixit: >yes, I do reject this. I see. Would you please… >> “for the time being”? If so, would you accept a patch >> that just disables -fauto-inc-dec on m68k *always*, >> even in the cases where it doesn’t ICE? (one-liner) answer whether this would be considerable? (Untested, but