On 02/15/2012 07:07 AM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
On 02/14/2012 06:51 PM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
Sebastian Hubersebastian.hu...@embedded-brains.de writes:
On 02/14/2012 04:05 PM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
Sebastian Hubersebastian.hu...@embedded-brains.de writes:
[...]
I would recommend that
On 2012-02-14 17:04:52 +, Andrew Haley wrote:
On 02/14/2012 04:54 PM, Geert Bosch wrote:
On Feb 14, 2012, at 11:44, Andrew Haley wrote:
On 02/14/2012 04:41 PM, Geert Bosch wrote:
Right now we don't have a library either that conforms to C99
Are you sure? As far as I know we
On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 7:54 PM, Christoph Lauter
christoph.lau...@lip6.fr wrote:
Hello,
first of all, let me apologize for my late answer to this very exciting
email thread.
As pointed out several times, the current libm suffers from several
disadvantages:
* The current libm code is a
On Thu, 9 Feb 2012, Andrew Haley wrote:
On 02/09/2012 04:53 PM, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
My view is that we should have a GNU libm project whose purpose is not
to install a library directly but to provide functions for use in other
projects (much like gnulib, but the functions could
On Tue, 14 Feb 2012, Christoph Lauter wrote:
As a matter of course, we'd be more than happy to get your input (and even
guidance w.r.t. copyright management and coding conventions) on and during
that project.
* GNU projects do not automatically need copyright assignments to the FSF
(some do,
This is a question on SUBREGs generated by lower-subreg.c and whether register
allocator is supposed to handle them efficiently.
Suppose the following small function compiled for AVR.
Remember AVR is 8-bit machine with int = HImode and UNITS_PER_WORD = 1.
int add (int val)
{
return val + 1;
Hi,
On Thu, Feb 09, 2012 at 08:26:06PM +0100, Toon Moene wrote:
On 02/09/2012 07:16 PM, Arnaud Charlet wrote:
Yes. Debian moved everything for some reason. It's a problem that must
be addressed somehow before gcc 4.7 is released.
It's extremely unfortunate that this will make it
Sebastian Huber sebastian.hu...@embedded-brains.de writes:
I mean the ABI described in Procedure Call Standard for the ARM
Architecture document number ARM IHI 0042D, current through ABI
release 2.08. In GCC this is ARM_ABI_AAPCS and ARM_ABI_AAPCS_LINUX?
That is my understanding, yes.
On 02/15/2012 09:30 AM, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
But to be absolutely clear, glibc's libm doesn't have a problem
meeting C99, AFAIK.
That's not quite correct. It is completely broken in directed
rounding modes (up to crashes).
Eh? C99 doesn't require directed rounding modes. I'll grant you,
On 02/15/2012 09:21 AM, Georg-Johann Lay wrote:
This is a question on SUBREGs generated by lower-subreg.c and whether register
allocator is supposed to handle them efficiently.
Suppose the following small function compiled for AVR.
Remember AVR is 8-bit machine with int = HImode and
I'm showing my ignorance here, but couldn't find an example of something
similar on another RISCy target, so here goes...
My latest round of testing showed these failures for MIPS16:
FAIL: 21_strings/basic_string/numeric_conversions/char/stod.cc execution test
FAIL:
Please consider the following patch:
--- o/INSTALL/README2010-03-22 14:56:56.0 +0100
+++ INSTALL/README 2012-02-15 19:30:09.416537896 +0100
@@ -4,3 +4,4 @@
gcc/doc/install.texi and copied into this directory.
To read this documentation, please point your HTML browser to
On 02/15/2012 11:53 AM, Richard Sandiford wrote:
We then trip:
/* Don't let us unwind past the handler context. */
gcc_assert (!match_handler);
in _Unwind_RaiseException_Phase2. What's the right thing to do here?
Ug. The Right Thing is to fix the unwinder so that it
On 02/15/2012 03:24 PM, Martin Jambor wrote:
Hi,
On Thu, Feb 09, 2012 at 08:26:06PM +0100, Toon Moene wrote:
On 02/09/2012 07:16 PM, Arnaud Charlet wrote:
Yes. Debian moved everything for some reason. It's a problem that must
be addressed somehow before gcc 4.7 is released.
It's extremely
On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 3:20 PM, Joseph S. Myers
jos...@codesourcery.com wrote:
On Mon, 13 Feb 2012, Samuel Bronson wrote:
... Notice how the one in invoke.texi has an additional invariant
section? What's up with this?
It looks like Ralf's 2008-07-30 commit (r138293) omitted to change
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52205
Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52205
--- Comment #11 from Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-15
08:13:29 UTC ---
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Wed Feb 15 08:13:22 2012
New Revision: 184256
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=184256
Log:
PR target/51921
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51921
--- Comment #14 from Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-15
08:13:29 UTC ---
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Wed Feb 15 08:13:22 2012
New Revision: 184256
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=184256
Log:
PR target/51921
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51921
--- Comment #13 from Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-15
08:13:20 UTC ---
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Wed Feb 15 08:13:09 2012
New Revision: 184255
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=184255
Log:
PR target/51921
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51921
Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52205
--- Comment #10 from Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-15
08:13:20 UTC ---
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Wed Feb 15 08:13:09 2012
New Revision: 184255
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=184255
Log:
PR target/51921
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52256
Bug #: 52256
Summary: CSE the memory load from both branches of if statement
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52241
--- Comment #1 from Igor Zamyatin izamyatin at gmail dot com 2012-02-15
09:06:49 UTC ---
BTW, this is a 4.7 regression
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52257
Bug #: 52257
Summary: [C++11] switch cases accept floating point constants
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51930
--- Comment #7 from Philipp s...@s-e-f-i.de 2012-02-15 09:29:27 UTC ---
The test struct might come from an external library I have no control of, which
will make it difficult to change its visibility. Currently, I have quite some
code that depends
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47486
--- Comment #3 from Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-15
09:33:45 UTC ---
Untested patch:
--- a/gcc/fortran/lang-specs.h
+++ b/gcc/fortran/lang-specs.h
@@ -68,7 +68,8 @@
{@f95,
f951 %i %{E:%{!cpp:%egfortran does not support
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47486
--- Comment #4 from Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-15
09:40:40 UTC ---
Missed some parts. Better patch - still completely untested (not even built). A
shorter version would be %{!E:%{!M*:, which is also completely untested.
---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52251
--- Comment #3 from Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-15
10:10:22 UTC ---
I wonder whether that's a [4.2-4.7] regression (backported to 4.1) due to the
patch for PR 25463. (I have not recompiled to check.)
My impression is that
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51930
--- Comment #8 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-15
10:15:06 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #7)
The test struct might come from an external library I have no control of,
which
will make it difficult to change its visibility.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47486
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=52258
Bug #: 52258
Summary: __builtin_isgreaterequal is sometimes signaling on ARM
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.3
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51930
--- Comment #9 from Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-15
10:53:37 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #8)
You could declare the struct before including that library's headers and set
its visibility with a pragma:
#pragma GCC visibility
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46886
--- Comment #12 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-15
11:05:31 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Wed Feb 15 11:05:26 2012
New Revision: 184263
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=184263
Log:
2012-02-15 Richard
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46886
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52248
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.7.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52256
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23286
--- Comment #34 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-15
11:19:55 UTC ---
*** Bug 52256 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52254
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52253
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52250
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.7.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52255
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-15
11:47:15 UTC ---
The problem is that lsm doesn't cleanup unnecessary VOP PHI after changing:
bb 5:
# b.2_21 = PHI b.3_10(10), b.2_19(8)
# .MEM_22 = PHI .MEM_18(10),
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52252
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=51930
--- Comment #10 from Philipp s...@s-e-f-i.de 2012-02-15 12:02:09 UTC ---
But think about a header only library. My test case isn't that far fetched. A
simple struct with no member functions (except for the implicitly generated
ones) should need no
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52255
--- Comment #4 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-15
12:08:38 UTC ---
It can also, when encountering a virtual PHI, simply rename all VOPs. LIM
could also fixup those PHIs after performing store-motion.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52259
Bug #: 52259
Summary: All tm tests fail on targets without pthread support
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52260
Bug #: 52260
Summary: [4.7 Regression] ICE in clone_tree_hash, at
dwarf2out.c:7424
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50561
--- Comment #10 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-15
12:20:23 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Wed Feb 15 12:20:10 2012
New Revision: 184265
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=184265
Log:
2012-02-15 Tobias
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50561
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52261
Bug #: 52261
Summary: [avr] Add support for AVR Xmega cores
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52261
Georg-Johann Lay gjl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52261
--- Comment #2 from Georg-Johann Lay gjl at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-15
13:16:01 UTC ---
Author: gjl
Date: Wed Feb 15 13:15:56 2012
New Revision: 184269
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=184269
Log:
libgcc/
PR target/52261
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52259
Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51930
--- Comment #11 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com 2012-02-15
13:50:07 UTC ---
(... wouldn't it be better to fix it? should read ... to change it?,
otherwise you are begging the question, eh)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52259
Greta Yorsh Greta.Yorsh at arm dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41518
lucdanton at free dot fr changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||lucdanton at free dot fr
---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52260
Andrew Stubbs ams at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ams at gcc dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47486
--- Comment #6 from Kai Tietz ktietz at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-15 15:30:58
UTC ---
I have tested variant suggested in #comment 4 and those in #comment 5. Both
are fixing the ICE. The file test.d (as used as crash example) will be created
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47486
--- Comment #7 from Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-15
15:51:45 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #5)
%{E|M|MM|MT|MQ|MD|MMD:;: F951_OPTIONS }
Good idea - and looks cleaner. Except (my bug) that -MD and -MMD do not imply
-E. Thus,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44783
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #26658|0 |1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52260
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.7.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41518
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu.org |jason at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23286
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #19634|0 |1
is
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51912
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52257
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51912
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52241
--- Comment #2 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com 2012-02-15
16:39:00 UTC ---
I don't understand what you mean by inlining, since '_Rb_tree_node_base' is a
*type* not a function.
Anyway, I don't see how Benjamin's split could
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51825
--- Comment #4 from Jerry DeLisle jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-15
17:08:51 UTC ---
I have been working on this one. The order of the lines within the namelist
file can cause the error to go away. I have also found that the read of the
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43548
Kai Tietz ktietz at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52262
Bug #: 52262
Summary: translatable string typos (3): REAl
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52255
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-checking
---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52152
--- Comment #2 from Rainer Orth ro at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-15 18:24:37 UTC
---
Author: ro
Date: Wed Feb 15 18:24:30 2012
New Revision: 184280
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=184280
Log:
XFAIL objc.dg/stabs-1.m on IRIX (PR
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52238
Kai Tietz ktietz at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ktietz at gcc dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23286
--- Comment #36 from Steven Bosscher steven at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-15
18:37:40 UTC ---
The patch was on one of the gsyprf machines, which are gone (didn't I already
tell you this before??). So the latest patch is lost...
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52263
Bug #: 52263
Summary: Zero-initialization doesn't seem to work correctly for
virtual inheritance
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.1
Status:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52263
--- Comment #1 from Ryan ryan_at_work_also at hotmail dot com 2012-02-15
18:39:38 UTC ---
I forgot to add the system - Linux 2.6.40.3-0.fc15.x86_64
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52042
--- Comment #10 from pmarlier at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-15 19:17:47 UTC ---
Author: pmarlier
Date: Wed Feb 15 19:17:42 2012
New Revision: 184281
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=184281
Log:
2012-02-15 Iain Sandoe
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52255
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-15
19:20:55 UTC ---
Created attachment 26667
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26667
gcc47-pr52255.patch
Untested fix.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52208
Vladimir Makarov vmakarov at redhat dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vmakarov at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41518
--- Comment #5 from Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-15
19:49:29 UTC ---
I agree with the analysis.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51368
--- Comment #2 from Benjamin Kosnik bkoz at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-15
19:56:12 UTC ---
Author: bkoz
Date: Wed Feb 15 19:56:07 2012
New Revision: 184282
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=184282
Log:
2012-02-15 Benjamin Kosnik
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51368
--- Comment #3 from Benjamin Kosnik bkoz at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-15
20:11:24 UTC ---
Mine.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52264
Bug #: 52264
Summary: translatable string typo: refernece
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51967
--- Comment #6 from Benjamin Kosnik bkoz at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-15
20:20:24 UTC ---
what's the python version you are using that is not working?
I am using 2.7.2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51368
--- Comment #4 from Benjamin Kosnik bkoz at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-15
20:24:51 UTC ---
This probably needs changing
http://gcc.gnu.org/install/configure.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52264
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=52265
Bug #: 52265
Summary: [OOP] TREE dump confusing with nested SELECT TYPE
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: diagnostic
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52227
--- Comment #1 from Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-15
20:59:06 UTC ---
A related issue, for
class(t), target, allocatable :: a(:)
target :: a
no error is printed - but it should!
The problem seems to be that already for the
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52199
--- Comment #2 from Michael Meissner meissner at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-15
21:17:46 UTC ---
Author: meissner
Date: Wed Feb 15 21:17:42 2012
New Revision: 184285
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=184285
Log:
[gcc]
2012-02-15
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52236
Zooko Wilcox-O'Hearn zooko at zooko dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52199
Michael Meissner meissner at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52221
gee jojelino at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[libffi] r184021 needs to |[libffi] r183675,r184021
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52199
--- Comment #3 from Michael Meissner meissner at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-15
21:42:04 UTC ---
Author: meissner
Date: Wed Feb 15 21:42:00 2012
New Revision: 184287
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=184287
Log:
[gcc]
2012-02-15
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52199
Michael Meissner meissner at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52266
Bug #: 52266
Summary: [4.7 Regression] syntax error in libgo/configure
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46986
--- Comment #19 from Anders F Björklund afb at users dot sourceforge.net
2012-02-15 22:08:59 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #17)
I think that now the only thing which will need to change in the Go frontend
proper is using otool instead of objcopy
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46986
--- Comment #22 from Anders F Björklund afb at users dot sourceforge.net
2012-02-15 22:16:41 UTC ---
Created attachment 26670
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26670
gcc-ucontext.diff
ucontext is deprecated on Mac OS X
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46986
--- Comment #21 from Anders F Björklund afb at users dot sourceforge.net
2012-02-15 22:12:24 UTC ---
Created attachment 26669
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26669
gcc-go_export.diff
Need to give both segment and section for
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46986
--- Comment #20 from Anders F Björklund afb at users dot sourceforge.net
2012-02-15 22:10:09 UTC ---
Created attachment 26668
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26668
updated patch for trunk
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46986
m...@gcc.gnu.org mrs at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mrs at gcc dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52220
--- Comment #1 from pmarlier at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-15 23:39:50 UTC ---
Author: pmarlier
Date: Wed Feb 15 23:39:28 2012
New Revision: 184293
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=184293
Log:
libitm/
2012-02-15 Iain Sandoe
1 - 100 of 176 matches
Mail list logo
