Hi Jakub,
> On 21 Jun 2022, at 12:33, Jakub Jelinek via Gcc wrote:
>
> The first release candidate for GCC 10.4 is available from
>
> https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/10.4.0-RC-20220621/
> ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/10.4.0-RC-20220621/
>
> and shortly its mirrors. It has been ge
On Thu, Jun 23, 2022 at 12:25 AM Bruno Haible wrote:
>
> Iain Sandoe wrote:
> > Yes (
> > # We can use an in-tree build of libintl.
> > if test -f ifelse([$1],,[../gettext-runtime],[$1])/uninstalled-config.sh;
> > then
> >
> > relative_builddir='ifelse([$1],,[${top_builddir}/..],[$1]/..)/gett
> On 23 Jun 2022, at 07:51, Iain Sandoe via Gcc wrote:
>
>> On 23 Jun 2022, at 05:24, Bruno Haible wrote:
>>
>> Iain Sandoe wrote:
>
>>> … although now I see some configure warnings about not being able to access
>>> build-aux (which I do not recall seeing with the previous hack - but that
> On 23 Jun 2022, at 16:40, Iain Sandoe via Gcc wrote:
>
>
>
>> On 23 Jun 2022, at 07:51, Iain Sandoe via Gcc wrote:
>>
>>> On 23 Jun 2022, at 05:24, Bruno Haible wrote:
>>>
>>> Iain Sandoe wrote:
>>
… although now I see some configure warnings about not being able to
access
Hi Dave,
Thanks for the suggestions,
I changed most of the things that you suggested, however reporting for
warnings like close of known invalid fd was problematic:
consider the following code:
if (fd >= 0)
{ write (fd,...); }
close(fd);
As I was checking the exploded graph for this; the "clos
diff --git gcc/Makefile.in gcc/Makefile.in
index b6dcc45a58a..04631f737ea 100644
--- gcc/Makefile.in
+++ gcc/Makefile.in
@@ -1269,6 +1269,7 @@ ANALYZER_OBJS = \
analyzer/region-model-reachability.o \
analyzer/sm.o \
analyzer/sm-file.o \
+ analyzer/sm-fd.o \
analyzer/sm-malloc.o \
analyzer
Snapshot gcc-10-20220623 is now available on
https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/10-20220623/
and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 10 git branch
with the following options: git://gcc.gnu.org/git/gcc.git branch
On Fri, 2022-06-24 at 00:00 +0530, Mir Immad wrote:
Thanks for the updated patch.
This is close to being ready.
One big issue is the target hook idea for isolating the target's
definition of the O_* flags as per Joseph's suggestion here:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc/2022-June/238961.html
