On 27 April 2010 02:16, Dave Korn dave.korn.cyg...@googlemail.com wrote:
Here, sometimes it's easier to show than to explain in terms of rules:
The wiki link has a template and an example. If you think it can be
improved, please do so.
Summary: Asterisks are only used for the first line of
[trimming Cc list]
It wouldn't be worth my time and I have trouble understanding how
I could demonstrate personal loss making the law suit worth persuing in
the first place.
Perhaps because you know the code better than anyone else, so you
could provide paid support on that derivative as
Hi,
I have looked a bit more and tried also ia-64 and bfin and actually I
can't find a single example where vectorized code using __restrict__
variables would break the dependency between stores and loads.
for this simple program:
unsigned short xxx(unsigned short* __restrict__ a, unsigned
Hi All,
For anyone interested, LLVM 2.7 was just released. You can read the
announcement here:
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvm-announce/2010-April/34.html
and read much more detailed release notes here:
http://llvm.org/releases/2.7/docs/ReleaseNotes.html
In addition to a huge
and read much more detailed release notes here:
http://llvm.org/releases/2.7/docs/ReleaseNotes.html
The correct writing of GCC is GCC, all capitalized. In particular gcc-4.5
should be written GCC 4.5 (like LLVM 2.7).
--
Eric Botcazou
Hi :
There is a pattern define_insn scode_mode in mips md file, like
(define_insn scode_mode
[(set (match_operand:CC 0 register_operand =z)
(swapped_fcond:CC (match_operand:SCALARF 1 register_operand f)
(match_operand:SCALARF 2 register_operand f)))]
To stay US-centric, have a look at:
http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap5.html
Any law that makes something illegal has to define the available
penalties associated.
You are confusing criminal and civil law. What you say is certainly true
for criminal law, where the other party is
Hi all,
I created the page on GCC Wiki with this info:
http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/GCC_Research
Please, feel free to update or rewrite completely
(if you feel that something is wrong, etc)...
Hope it will be of any use ;) ...
Cheers,
Grigori
-Original Message-
From: Manuel López-Ibáñez
Hi.
Right now I know confused by the usage of clobber match_scratch.
The scene is as follows:
1.Target cpu is with only a 8 bit ACC register( but I make 16 virtual
registers, for reload problems).
2.For HImode operands, I let them never to goto ACC combined with
other virtual registers.
3.for
On 04/27/2010 11:42 AM, Amker.Cheng wrote:
Hi :
There is a pattern define_insn scode_mode in mips md file, like
(define_insn scode_mode
[(set (match_operand:CC 0 register_operand =z)
(swapped_fcond:CC (match_operand:SCALARF 1 register_operand f)
On 04/27/2010 03:46 AM, Russ Allbery wrote:
This is all relatively easily handled under the copyright policy on
the academic side of the house for students and faculty.
Unless it's institutional work... I was in the same boat during my
own Ph.D. studies, cherrypicking what to send for
redriver jiang jiang.redri...@gmail.com writes:
test3.c:27: error: insn does not satisfy its constraints:
(insn 52 51 32 0 (parallel [
(set (reg:HI 16 BASE0)
(plus:HI (reg:HI 16 BASE0)
(const_int -2 [0xfffe])))
(clobber
On 27 April 2010 14:27, Grigori Fursin gfur...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi all,
I created the page on GCC Wiki with this info:
http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/GCC_Research
Please, feel free to update or rewrite completely
(if you feel that something is wrong, etc)...
I think that a verbatim copy of the
Hello,
I have been playing with LTO. I notice that LTO doesn't work when
object files are achived into static library files and the final
binary is linked against them, although these object files are compiled
with -flto and I can see all the lto related sections in .a files.
Is this what is
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hey
I want to say a quick thank you for accepting my proposal Partial
Implementation of Python as a GCC Front-end.
Can't wait to get started :).
- --Phil
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with
On 04/26/10 22:09, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
Greg McGaryg...@mcgary.org writes:
I have a port without div or mod machine instructions. I wrote
divmodsi4 patterns that do the libcall directly, hoping that GCC would
recognize the opportunity to use a single divmodsi4 to compute both
quotient
I've been following the discussion a bit about contributing, and find
myself here now even directly pointed at :-) As I mentioned, I am not very
experienced with GCC, for one thing I have not studied other ports very
much. To make a GCC patch for this problem to be generally handled is then
a bit
And how are potential contributors supposed to know this?
They're really not. The fundamental problem here is that this area of
the law is not only very complicated, but is really all guesswork
since there are few, if any, relevant cases. Moreover, this is an
area of the law
Alfred M. Szmidt a...@gnu.org writes:
That is more or less what a potentional contributor gets via email
when submitting a patch. I don't see how a web form would make things
different.
True, but I think it would make a significant difference if the web
form could be filled out online
Bingfeng Mei b...@broadcom.com writes:
I have been playing with LTO. I notice that LTO doesn't work when
object files are achived into static library files and the final
binary is linked against them, although these object files are compiled
with -flto and I can see all the lto related
On Mon, Apr 26, 2010 at 21:03, Mark Mielke m...@mark.mielke.cc wrote:
They can take a copy of your code and modify it, but at no time does your
original code become non-free. As long as people continue to copy from your
free version of the code, they can continue to use it for free.
The GPL
That is more or less what a potentional contributor gets via
email when submitting a patch. I don't see how a web form would
make things different.
True, but I think it would make a significant difference if the web
form could be filled out online without requiring a piece of
On 27 April 2010 22:45, Alfred M. Szmidt a...@gnu.org wrote:
That is more or less what a potentional contributor gets via
email when submitting a patch. I don't see how a web form would
make things different.
True, but I think it would make a significant difference if the web
On 4/19/10 10:43 , Laurynas Biveinis wrote:
1) New API in libiberty for creating of hash tables and splay trees
with user-specified callbacks for allocation. Needs libiberty
maintainer review.
2) Make gengtype accept variable_size GTY option and output typed GC
allocators to gtype-desc.h.
As for flexible, it seems clear that the current form is not
sufficiently personalized, which makes it more difficult to get it
signed by an employer.
If you need something specific, you should contact le...@gnu.org.
They are quite flexible, I do not know where people got the idea that
If you need something specific, you should contact le...@gnu.org.
They are quite flexible, I do not know where people got the idea that
they are not.
You're missing the point. If flexibilty isn't the DEFAULT people
won't know about it and will think it doesn't exist and complain. I
strongly
On 27 April 2010 23:27, Alfred M. Szmidt a...@gnu.org wrote:
As for flexible, it seems clear that the current form is not
sufficiently personalized, which makes it more difficult to get it
signed by an employer.
If you need something specific, you should contact le...@gnu.org.
They are
People will always find reasons to complain, but most people (and
companies) seem to be happy with how the copyright assignments look
today.
1) The back-and-forth is too much for casual contributors. If it is
more effort to do the legal work than to submit the first patch,
then they will never submit any patch at all.
Please do not exaggerate, if people have time for threads like these,
then they have time to send a short
Snapshot gcc-4.4-20100427 is now available on
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/4.4-20100427/
and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 4.4 SVN branch
with the following options: svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/branches
This year GCC received 10 slots for Google Summer of Code. The full
list of the accepted projects is at
http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/SummerOfCode.
Unfortunately, we could not accept all the proposals. But that should
not discourage folks from contributing, anyway. To increase chances
of acceptance
You can get the RTL for these patterns when expanding stores like
a = (b c);
In this case, GCC tries to avoid a conditional branch and (I suppose you are
on GCC 4.5) instead of cmpmode and bcond you go through cmpmode and
scond. cmpmode does nothing but stashing away its operands,
--- Comment #3 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-27 06:16 ---
It depends on what the platform allows, I'm not familiar with it at all.
If you can force dumping core and getting backtrace from it, that would be
interesting info, if you can preload some library to print backtrace
--- Comment #1 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-27 07:27 ---
Bonus points if the C/C++ FE share most of the code related to this warning (so
we only have one place to fix in the future).
--
manu at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #10 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-27 07:38 ---
Subject: Bug 43896
Author: janus
Date: Tue Apr 27 07:38:06 2010
New Revision: 158767
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=158767
Log:
2010-04-27 Janus Weil ja...@gcc.gnu.org
PR
--- Comment #11 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-27 07:41 ---
The commit in comment #10 fixes the fortran-dev regression, but not the
original problem in comment #0.
--
janus at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #4 from ktietz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-27 07:52 ---
(In reply to comment #2)
As it turns out, the ICE only manifests in a parallel build. I tried make -j
8,
my default and make -j 3.
For an ordinary make there is no issue. So, I'm curious how to handle this.
Any
--- Comment #21 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-27 08:41 ---
Subject: Bug 18918
Author: burnus
Date: Tue Apr 27 08:41:00 2010
New Revision: 158768
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=158768
Log:
2010-04-27 Tobias Burnus bur...@net-b.de
PR
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-27 09:25 ---
It's not a bug. const restrict doesn't say anything special and restrict
only disambiguates against other restrict pointers. Thus, the store through
a _can_ modify what b points to.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu
--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-27 09:30 ---
local statics need to be mangled before SRA changes the function signature.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.6.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43903
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-27 09:33 ---
(In reply to comment #1)
Some further investigation shows that there is code in expand_expr_real_2 that
is supposed to be able to generate multiply-accumulate instructions, but it
isn't general enough. In my
--- Comment #8 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-27 09:34 ---
Subject: Bug 40657
Author: bernds
Date: Tue Apr 27 09:34:08 2010
New Revision: 158771
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=158771
Log:
PR target/40657
* config/arm/arm.c
--- Comment #9 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-27 09:35 ---
Fixed.
--
bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-27 09:36 ---
I can't get it to FAIL either. Tried various -march=XXX in
make check-gcc RUNTESTFLAGS=--target_board=unix/-m32/-march=atom
compile.exp=pr42196-2.c
HJ, what arch do you configure for?
--
--- Comment #14 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2010-04-27 09:38 ---
If the testsuite run produces nothing, can you check the object files of the
two stage2 compilers (working and broken) for differences in code generation?
That could help narrow down which file is being
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-27 09:41 ---
The ICE has been fixed on the trunk (PR42653). With the fix we now run into
lto1: internal compiler error: in dwarf2out_finish, at dwarf2out.c:21433
Please submit a full bug report,
with preprocessed source if
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot
|dot org
--- Comment #2 from alexey dot salmin at gmail dot com 2010-04-27 09:46
---
restrict only disambiguates against other restrict pointers.
Can you please support that assertion with a reference?
ISO/IEC 9899:TC2 Committee Draft May 6, 2005, 6.7.3 paragraph 7
An object that is
--- Comment #15 from bernds at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-27 09:47 ---
Thanks. Could you attach those object files (ignoring ifcvt.o since it
obviously changes due to the source change)?
Even better would be if you could produce assembly output by finding the
command that produced
--- Comment #10 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-27 10:08
---
Subject: Bug 43812
Author: jamborm
Date: Tue Apr 27 10:07:47 2010
New Revision: 158777
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=158777
Log:
2010-04-27 Martin Jambor mjam...@suse.cz
PR
--- Comment #12 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2010-04-27 10:26 ---
The commit in comment #10 fixes the fortran-dev regression, but not the
original problem in comment #0.
The original problem in comment #0 is probably a duplicate of pr42051 both
fails with
internal compiler
--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-27 10:33 ---
(In reply to comment #2)
restrict only disambiguates against other restrict pointers.
Can you please support that assertion with a reference?
ISO/IEC 9899:TC2 Committee Draft May 6, 2005, 6.7.3 paragraph 7
--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-27 10:37 ---
Which would be implemented by
Index: gcc/tree-ssa-alias.c
===
--- gcc/tree-ssa-alias.c(revision 158770)
+++ gcc/tree-ssa-alias.c
--- Comment #5 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-27 10:38 ---
Note that the patches will break Fortran quite seriously.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43907
--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-27 11:17 ---
WONTFIX on the 4.3 branch.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #11 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-27 11:27
---
Subject: Bug 40561
Author: rguenth
Date: Tue Apr 27 11:27:18 2010
New Revision: 158778
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=158778
Log:
2010-04-27 Richard Guenther rguent...@suse.de
PR
The following code:
struct A { int r0; int r1; };
void sigh(struct A *a, const int d)
{
int i;
for (i = 0; i 8; ++i) {
if (d (1U i))
a-r0 = 1;
else
a-r1 = 1;
}
}
compiled using
../../g++-4.5.svn/gcc/tree-ssa-structalias.c: In function 'constraint_expr
get_function_part_constraint(variable_info*, unsigned int)':
../../g++-4.5.svn/gcc/tree-ssa-structalias.c:3644:29: error: enumeral and
non-enumeral type in conditional expression [-Werror]
cc1plus: all warnings being
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-27 12:11 ---
Mine.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #8 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-27 12:14 ---
Subject: Bug 43116
Author: rguenth
Date: Tue Apr 27 12:13:52 2010
New Revision: 158781
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=158781
Log:
2010-04-27 Richard Guenther rguent...@suse.de
--- Comment #12 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-27 12:16
---
Fixed.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
--- Comment #9 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-27 12:16 ---
Fixed.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
--- Comment #13 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-27 12:16
---
Subject: Bug 38564
Author: rguenth
Date: Tue Apr 27 12:15:53 2010
New Revision: 158782
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=158782
Log:
2010-04-27 Richard Guenther rguent...@suse.de
--- Comment #13 from fmartinez at gmv dot com 2010-04-27 12:56 ---
I have not got that far to the linking step. I am converting some code to a
more OOP style.
I have tried to patch my local version but unfrtunately what I have downloaded,
4.5_20100422 and 4.5_20100424, do not seem to
--- Comment #3 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-04-27 13:07 ---
Ooops. I meant Linux/ia64.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43901
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
GCC target triplet||ia64-*-*
Target Milestone|--- |4.6.0
On Linux/ia32, revision 158765 gave
FAIL: gcc.dg/Walways-true-1.c (test for excess errors)
FAIL: gcc.dg/Walways-true-1.c correct warning (test for warnings, line 29)
FAIL: gcc.dg/Walways-true-1.c correct warning (test for warnings, line 33)
FAIL: gcc.dg/Walways-true-1.c correct warning (test for
--- Comment #5 from rainer at emrich-ebersheim dot de 2010-04-27 13:15
---
(In reply to comment #4)
(In reply to comment #2)
As it turns out, the ICE only manifests in a parallel build. I tried make
-j 8,
my default and make -j 3.
For an ordinary make there is no issue. So,
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.6.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43910
--- Comment #14 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-27 13:30 ---
(In reply to comment #13)
I have not got that far to the linking step. I am converting some code to a
more OOP style. I have tried to patch my local version but unfrtunately what
I have downloaded, 4.5_20100422
--- Comment #1 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-04-27 13:58 ---
Fixed by revision 158769.
--
hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #22 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-04-27 13:59
---
On Linux/ia32, I got
FAIL: gfortran.dg/coarray_12.f90 -O scan-tree-dump-times original
a.dim.0..ubound = .* nn; 1
FAIL: gfortran.dg/coarray_12.f90 -O scan-tree-dump-times original
a.dim.1..ubound = .* mm; 1
--- Comment #23 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-27 14:09 ---
Subject: Bug 18918
Author: burnus
Date: Tue Apr 27 14:09:29 2010
New Revision: 158785
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=158785
Log:
2010-04-27 Tobias Burnus bur...@net-b.de
PR
--- Comment #4 from pluto at agmk dot net 2010-04-27 14:10 ---
(In reply to comment #3)
Sorry:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-07/msg01166.html
--enable-build-with-cxx will change the plugin framework interface to match
the C++ plugin symbol mangling but in such case users
--- Comment #5 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-27 15:19 ---
C++ plugins are not supported. They only happen to work with the
build-gcc-with-c++ trick.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #16 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2010-04-27 15:24 ---
Thanks. Could you attach those object files (ignoring ifcvt.o since it
obviously changes due to the source change)?
Even better would be if you could produce assembly output by finding the
command that
--- Comment #17 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2010-04-27 15:27 ---
Created an attachment (id=20499)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20499action=view)
bziped tar file containing the *.i and *.s files
The *_f.* files corresponds to the failing bootstrap and the
The test code which fails to compile with g++ on both 4.4.3 and 4.5.0:
#include iostream
int main(void)
{
std::cout Hello. std::endl;
return 0;
}
$ gcc test.c++
/usr/lib/gcc/powerpc-gnu-linux-uclibc/4.5.0/../../../libstdc++.so: undefined
reference to `_Unwind_GetIPInfo'
--- Comment #11 from dougmencken at gmail dot com 2010-04-27 17:07 ---
GCC 4.5.0 bootstraps without --disable-checking (Configured with: ./configure
--prefix=/usr --sysconfdir=/etc
--mandir=/usr/share/man --build=powerpc-gnu-linux-uclibc
--host=powerpc-gnu-linux-uclibc
--- Comment #1 from redi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-27 17:15 ---
that symbol is defined in libgcc_s.so - is that file present in the same
directory as libstdc++.so?
If you add -v to the compilation command it will show you the directories gcc
searches, is libgcc_s.so in any of those
--- Comment #2 from redi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-27 17:16 ---
oh wait a second ... what happens if you compile with g++ not gcc?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43911
--- Comment #3 from dougmencken at gmail dot com 2010-04-27 17:18 ---
I do not compile c++ sources with gcc. Yes, I mistyped gcc instead of g++ in
the first message, sorry.
$ g++ test.c\+\+
/usr/lib/gcc/powerpc-gnu-linux-uclibc/4.5.0/../../../libstdc++.so: undefined
reference to
--- Comment #4 from dougmencken at gmail dot com 2010-04-27 17:20 ---
$ g++ -v test.c\+\+
Using built-in specs.
COLLECT_GCC=g++
COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/usr/libexec/gcc/powerpc-gnu-linux-uclibc/4.5.0/lto-wrapper
Target: powerpc-gnu-linux-uclibc
Configured with: ./configure --prefix=/usr
--- Comment #5 from dougmencken at gmail dot com 2010-04-27 17:28 ---
$ find / -name libgcc_s.so
/usr/lib/libgcc_s.so
$ objdump -x /usr/lib/libgcc_s.so
objdump: /usr/lib/libgcc_s.so: File format not recognized
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43911
--- Comment #3 from jv244 at cam dot ac dot uk 2010-04-27 18:07 ---
still fails with current trunk.
--
jv244 at cam dot ac dot uk changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known
--- Comment #6 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-27 18:08 ---
See PR 14192 on why this is restrict is ignored here.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 14192 ***
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #12 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-27 18:08
---
*** Bug 43907 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #11 from jv244 at cam dot ac dot uk 2010-04-27 18:25 ---
the original loop gets now (4.6.0) vectorized, and gets the same performance as
the 'hand optimized loop' (which does not get vectorized):
./a.out
default loop 0.880055003
hand optimized loop
--- Comment #13 from jason at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-27 18:56 ---
Subject: Bug 42844
Author: jason
Date: Tue Apr 27 18:56:13 2010
New Revision: 158797
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=158797
Log:
PR c++/42844
* decl.c
--- Comment #2 from jason at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-27 19:04 ---
Subject: Bug 41468
Author: jason
Date: Tue Apr 27 19:04:09 2010
New Revision: 158798
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=158798
Log:
PR c++/41468
* class.c (convert_to_base): Add
--- Comment #3 from jason at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-27 19:04 ---
Subject: Bug 41468
Author: jason
Date: Tue Apr 27 19:04:23 2010
New Revision: 158799
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=158799
Log:
PR c++/41468
* call.c (convert_like_real)
--- Comment #12 from dougmencken at gmail dot com 2010-04-27 19:13 ---
$ cat /usr/lib/libgcc_s.so
/* GNU ld script
Use the shared library, but some functions are only in
the static library. */
GROUP ( libgcc_s.so.1 libgcc.a )
$ readelf -s /usr/lib/libgcc_s.so.1 | grep Unwind
--- Comment #6 from dougmencken at gmail dot com 2010-04-27 19:15 ---
$ cat /usr/lib/libgcc_s.so
/* GNU ld script
Use the shared library, but some functions are only in
the static library. */
GROUP ( libgcc_s.so.1 libgcc.a )
$ readelf -s /usr/lib/libgcc_s.so.1 | grep Unwind
--- Comment #7 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-27 19:17 ---
Are you sure that the newly built libgcc_s.so.1 is being installed?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43911
--- Comment #8 from dougmencken at gmail dot com 2010-04-27 19:22 ---
Yes, I'm sure, I'm using http://manulix.wikidot.com/files:prepare-mx-chroot-sh
script with --fresh option, so I do always have a fresh chroot environment in 5
minutes for powerpc uclibc, and I can also easily switch
--- Comment #16 from dfranke at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-27 19:42
---
Closing then.
--
dfranke at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #12 from dfranke at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-27 19:48
---
*** Bug 43091 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34640
--- Comment #3 from dfranke at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-27 19:48 ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 34640 ***
--
dfranke at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from justin at mattair dot net 2010-04-27 19:52 ---
I have upgraded this to critical because it causes data corruption and because
I am not certain how to classify this. Lower if needed.
--
justin at mattair dot net changed:
What|Removed
1 - 100 of 127 matches
Mail list logo
