On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 23:38, Paolo Bonzini bonz...@gnu.org wrote:
On 03/03/2011 05:26 PM, Diego Novillo wrote:
On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 00:27, Paolo Bonzinibonz...@gnu.org wrote:
On 03/02/2011 10:00 PM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
That does not sound like the right approach to me. Why not add
On 03/04/2011 04:03 PM, Diego Novillo wrote:
Sure, but my question was whether I should prepare a patch to fix the
current lack of consistency between the two definitions.
Certainly. I'm not sure it would be acceptable for 4.6, but it is worth
posting it.
Paolo
On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 07:07, Paolo Bonzini bonz...@gnu.org wrote:
On 03/04/2011 04:03 PM, Diego Novillo wrote:
Sure, but my question was whether I should prepare a patch to fix the
current lack of consistency between the two definitions.
Certainly. I'm not sure it would be acceptable for
Hi,
We have set up a new GCC mirror server offering HTTP access:
http://fileboar.com/gcc/
This server is located in Nicosia, Cyprus. The update is scheduled twice a week.
Thanks in advance for listing us.
---
with best regards,
Grigory Rayskin
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47984
Summary: Pointer dummy argument mismatch not detected by
Fortran compiler
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47985
Summary: suppose pure abstract function resolve error
Product: gcc
Version: 4.3.3
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
AssignedTo:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47925
rsand...@gcc.gnu.org rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47985
Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44499
--- Comment #13 from Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-04
10:02:19 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #12)
Manu, can we close this?
@Jonathan
I still think that the messages of Comeau and Clang are better than GCC's. I
will try for
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47985
--- Comment #2 from Gennady gvolozhanin at mail dot ru 2011-03-04 10:05:39
UTC ---
everybody, sorry for disturbance
A got entry for virtual void foo()=0; even for =0
so ‘foo’ is ambiguous for C
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47975
--- Comment #4 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-04
10:27:17 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Fri Mar 4 10:27:10 2011
New Revision: 170672
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=170672
Log:
2011-03-04 Richard
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47975
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47968
--- Comment #9 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-04
10:31:38 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Fri Mar 4 10:31:33 2011
New Revision: 170673
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=170673
Log:
2011-03-04 Richard
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47968
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47981
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44281
--- Comment #8 from Adam Warner adam at consulting dot net.nz 2011-03-04
10:51:01 UTC ---
Jakub, I fail to see how your conclusion not to do this is supported by the
facts. There are:
(a) six global register variables (though the same effect can
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47976
Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus at gcc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47986
Summary: gcc.c-torture/execute/20040709-1.c fails with
non-delegitimized UNSPEC
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44281
--- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-04
11:22:51 UTC ---
You are talking about this single testcase, I'm talking in general that if gcc
is on x86_64 tuned for a medium sized general purpose register file and you
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44499
--- Comment #14 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-04
11:23:41 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #13)
(In reply to comment #12)
Manu, can we close this?
@Jonathan
I still think that the messages of Comeau and Clang are
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47986
--- Comment #1 from Alan Modra amodra at gmail dot com 2011-03-04 11:24:02
UTC ---
I can easily fix rs6000_delegitimize_address to handle this debug expression,
but I suspect that would be papering over the real problem, the duplicate
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44499
Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47987
Summary: ICE on legal code (when attempting to inline
non-implicitly instantiated template member function)
Product: gcc
Version: 4.5.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47987
--- Comment #1 from niemayer at isg dot de 2011-03-04 11:43:25 UTC ---
The line that gcc reports to cause the ICE contains:
if (offset_a2-preallocate(text_1.length())) {
offset_a2 is an instance of class Arrayunsigned long, true, _TAbsPtr,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47986
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33928
--- Comment #115 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-04
11:58:13 UTC ---
Hm, there doesn't seem to be a runtime testcase attached to this bug, so I
can't produce numbers for the upcoming 4.6 release. Brad, can you do so
if
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33699
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|mips*-* powerpc*-*-*|mips*-*
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47967
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47986
Alan Modra amodra at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33763
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2007-10-14 10:26:41 |2011-03-04
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32643
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2007-12-07 20:19:26 |2011-03-04
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47977
Marco Lazzarotto m.lazzarotto at robox dot it changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|target |c
---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47988
Summary: ICE: in reload_cse_simplify_operands, at
postreload.c:403: insn does not satisfy its
constraints
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47987
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47967
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-04
13:36:50 UTC ---
Created attachment 23543
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=23543
gcc46-pr47967.patch
Untested fix. Or is there some better place to check
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47981
--- Comment #2 from Sean McGovern gseanmcg at gmail dot com 2011-03-04
13:37:11 UTC ---
According to the manpage, cabs() is in libm on Solaris 10.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47989
Summary: -mrecip causes 482.sphinx3 to miscompare
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P3
Component: target
AssignedTo:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47990
Summary: Missed promotion of double precision constants to
single precision for -funsafe-math-optimizations
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47694
--- Comment #23 from Jerry DeLisle jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-04
14:42:57 UTC ---
Final fix was added here:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=revisionrevision=170476
For reference when we back port this to 4.5.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47966
--- Comment #10 from Dainis Jonitis jonitis at gmail dot com 2011-03-04
14:55:56 UTC ---
Actually the same problem is with function scope static variables.
int
main(int argc, char *argv[])
{
static int fvar1;
static int fvar2 = 0;
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46220
--- Comment #6 from Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-04
15:18:03 UTC ---
Author: jason
Date: Fri Mar 4 15:17:55 2011
New Revision: 170676
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=170676
Log:
PR c++/46220
*
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47971
--- Comment #3 from Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-04
15:18:12 UTC ---
Author: jason
Date: Fri Mar 4 15:18:07 2011
New Revision: 170677
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=170677
Log:
PR c++/47971
* pt.c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47971
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33699
Michael Matz matz at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||matz at gcc dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47977
--- Comment #4 from joseph at codesourcery dot com joseph at codesourcery dot
com 2011-03-04 15:35:20 UTC ---
On Fri, 4 Mar 2011, m.lazzarotto at robox dot it wrote:
My target is effectively an e500v2.
I also tried to pass -mabi=spe, with no
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47990
--- Comment #1 from joseph at codesourcery dot com joseph at codesourcery dot
com 2011-03-04 15:42:39 UTC ---
On Fri, 4 Mar 2011, rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
In 482.sphinx3 we have code like
float foo (float x, float y)
{
return
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47372
--- Comment #3 from Dan Horak dan at danny dot cz 2011-03-04 15:46:23 UTC ---
Created attachment 23544
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=23544
preprocessed source file
got the same ICE when building xulrunner on Fedora 15 on
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47984
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47957
--- Comment #4 from Dodji Seketeli dodji at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-04
16:01:03 UTC ---
Sure.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47989
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33928
--- Comment #116 from lucier at math dot purdue.edu 2011-03-04 16:09:13 UTC ---
On Fri, 2011-03-04 at 11:59 +, rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33928
--- Comment #115 from Richard Guenther
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33928
--- Comment #117 from rguenther at suse dot de rguenther at suse dot de
2011-03-04 16:14:55 UTC ---
On Fri, 4 Mar 2011, lucier at math dot purdue.edu wrote:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33928
--- Comment #116 from lucier at
I believe f could do:
assert (arg != aoeuaoeuaeouaeouaoeuaoeaoxbxod);
which would then fail with the proposed optimization. It is unspecified if
two string literals with the same content are distinct objects, but foo must
be
a distinct object (ok, with static const char foo[] =
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47980
--- Comment #7 from Jan Hubicka hubicka at ucw dot cz 2011-03-04 16:26:06 UTC
---
I believe f could do:
assert (arg != aoeuaoeuaeouaeouaoeuaoeaoxbxod);
which would then fail with the proposed optimization. It is unspecified if
two string
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47372
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47984
Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47802
--- Comment #31 from Janne Blomqvist jb at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-04
17:37:23 UTC ---
Author: jb
Date: Fri Mar 4 17:37:11 2011
New Revision: 170679
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=170679
Log:
PR 47802 Update doc for CTIME
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47802
--- Comment #32 from Janne Blomqvist jb at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-04
17:52:43 UTC ---
Author: jb
Date: Fri Mar 4 17:52:10 2011
New Revision: 170680
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=170680
Log:
PR 47802 Hack to work around
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25829
Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus at gcc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25829
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47991
Summary: [4.6 Regression] Var-tracking ICE on s390x
*setmem_long insn
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47991
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47991
--- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-04
18:37:41 UTC ---
Created attachment 23545
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=23545
gcc46-pr47991.patch
Untested fix.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47372
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-04
18:40:04 UTC ---
s390 bug moved to PR47991.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47497
--- Comment #20 from Jan Hubicka hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-04
18:49:27 UTC ---
Author: hubicka
Date: Fri Mar 4 18:49:23 2011
New Revision: 170682
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=170682
Log:
PR lto/47497
*
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47497
Jan Hubicka hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47984
--- Comment #3 from Thomas Henlich thenlich at users dot sourceforge.net
2011-03-04 18:58:06 UTC ---
Sorry, I don't understand why you consider the bug report invalid. You may very
well be correct, but please explain. I am not such a Fortran
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47802
--- Comment #33 from Janne Blomqvist jb at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-04
19:07:53 UTC ---
Author: jb
Date: Fri Mar 4 19:07:49 2011
New Revision: 170683
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=170683
Log:
PR 47802 Use builtins to check
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47802
--- Comment #34 from Janne Blomqvist jb at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-04
19:15:34 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #30)
On Fri, 25 Feb 2011, burnus at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
Please shout loudly if there you still encounter a build failure!
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47984
--- Comment #4 from Steve Kargl sgk at troutmask dot apl.washington.edu
2011-03-04 19:16:27 UTC ---
On Fri, Mar 04, 2011 at 06:58:19PM +, thenlich at users dot sourceforge.net
wrote:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47984
---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47984
--- Comment #5 from Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-04
19:39:32 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #3)
Sorry, I don't understand why you consider the bug report invalid.
You may very well be correct, but please explain. I am not such
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47992
Summary: ICE: SIGSEGV in ira_reuse_stack_slot
(ira-color.c:2887) with -fweb
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47993
Summary: `internal error: Killed'
Product: gcc
Version: 4.3.5
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
AssignedTo: unassig...@gcc.gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47994
Summary: -fcompare-debug failure with -O2 -fpeel-loops
-fno-rerun-cse-after-loop -fno-tree-loop-optimize
-fno-web
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47992
--- Comment #1 from Zdenek Sojka zsojka at seznam dot cz 2011-03-04 20:02:03
UTC ---
Seems I forgot to paste the compiler output:
$ gcc -O -fno-dce -fgcse -fno-tree-ccp -fno-tree-dominator-opts
-funroll-all-loops -wrapper
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46263
--- Comment #1 from Douglas Mencken dougmencken at gmail dot com 2011-03-04
20:05:27 UTC ---
With the following patch commands:
http://ftp.osuosl.org/pub/manulix/scripts/build-scripts/PATCHCMDS/patchcmds-gcc
GCC v 4.6.0 builds fine (snapshot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46263
--- Comment #2 from Douglas Mencken dougmencken at gmail dot com 2011-03-04
20:15:08 UTC ---
Oops. Sorry. Wrong bug report. The correct one is
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47885 (i.e.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47862
Peter Bergner bergner at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43290
Ryan Hill dirtyepic at gentoo dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dirtyepic at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47995
--- Comment #1 from Jian Peng jipeng at broadcom dot com 2011-03-04 22:07:40
UTC ---
Created attachment 23549
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=23549
generated from --save-temps
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47995
Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47996
Summary: Bug in atomicity.h
Product: gcc
Version: 4.5.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
AssignedTo: unassig...@gcc.gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47996
coirius at coirius dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |minor
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44629
--- Comment #5 from Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-04
22:24:30 UTC ---
Created attachment 23550
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=23550
WIP patch to accept my testcase
Here's a patch that makes my testcase work.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44629
--- Comment #6 from Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-04
22:30:16 UTC ---
Created attachment 23551
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=23551
WIP patch to make the testcase sorry as before
And here's a patch that just
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47899
--- Comment #6 from Zdenek Dvorak rakdver at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-04
22:41:48 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #5)
Thanks, this patch seems to work (I've bootstrapped/regtested it on
x86_64-linux and i686-linux together with the #c3 testcase
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47899
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-04
22:44:40 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #6)
(In reply to comment #5)
Thanks, this patch seems to work (I've bootstrapped/regtested it on
x86_64-linux and i686-linux together
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47995
--- Comment #2 from Jian Peng jipeng at broadcom dot com 2011-03-04 22:44:56
UTC ---
Here is simpler testing program, first, unzip FrameLoader.ii.tar.bz2 (attached
last time), then
$ mipsel-linux-c++ -c FrameLoader.ii -o FrameLoader.o -O2 -fPIC
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47755
--- Comment #6 from Michael Meissner meissner at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-04
22:45:43 UTC ---
Created attachment 23552
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=23552
Patch to tighten up V2DI constants.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47755
Michael Meissner meissner at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47986
--- Comment #4 from Alan Modra amodra at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-04 22:59:10
UTC ---
Author: amodra
Date: Fri Mar 4 22:59:07 2011
New Revision: 170687
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=170687
Log:
PR target/47986
*
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47986
--- Comment #5 from Alan Modra amodra at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-04 23:04:23
UTC ---
Author: amodra
Date: Fri Mar 4 23:04:20 2011
New Revision: 170688
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=170688
Log:
PR target/47986
*
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47986
Alan Modra amodra at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47967
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-04
23:07:22 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri Mar 4 23:07:20 2011
New Revision: 170689
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=170689
Log:
PR
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47967
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43829
--- Comment #34 from Mikael Morin mikael at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-04
23:14:59 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #33)
My only remark is about the test in comment #31 for which
the dg-warning in
[...]
should be moved to the line above:
and the
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47996
Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46459
--- Comment #4 from Mikael Morin mikael at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-04
23:37:00 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #3)
I am not sure to understand comment #2.
You're right, assumed shapes are only for procedure arguments. For derived
types components
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45797
--- Comment #4 from Mikael Morin mikael at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-04
23:49:27 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #3)
The patch in comment #2 fixes the ICE, but yields several more errors:
Yes, because without the patch gfortran was killed before
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47878
--- Comment #27 from Jerry DeLisle jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-05
00:05:40 UTC ---
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Sat Mar 5 00:05:34 2011
New Revision: 170692
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=170692
Log:
2011-03-04 Jakub
1 - 100 of 130 matches
Mail list logo
