https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116087
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116021
--- Comment #9 from Eric Gallager ---
Ah, looking at gcc/ada/gcc-interface/Makefile.in, perhaps the issue is that I
need to set GNATLINK in my environment, too, besides just GNATMAKE and
GNATBIND... perhaps the issue was arising due to having
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116021
--- Comment #7 from Eric Gallager ---
Well ok, could someone send me a binary x86_64 build of GCC for darwin20 with
Ada support that they can bootstrap with successfully, then, so that I can get
back to bootstrapping, too? Either that, or send
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96635
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116021
--- Comment #4 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to Andreas Schwab from comment #3)
> You need to use an older Ada compiler (13 or older) for bootstrapping, not
> any of the broken intermediate versions between Aug 2023 and Jan 2024.
I wonder
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96635
--- Comment #5 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to Mark Harmstone from comment #4)
> (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #2)
> > The patches to support CodeView is being added (and improved) for GCC 15. I
> > am not sure how much will be
Keywords: build
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
CC: iains at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
I was trying to figure this out
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96635
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mark at harmstone dot com
--- Comment
Priority: P3
Component: c
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Sometimes a header outside of my control will do #pragma GCC poison on an
identifier that I disagree about its deservingness for poisoning. Say
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96635
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=6906
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85563
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47229
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68524
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115885
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115880
--- Comment #3 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to Iain Sandoe from comment #2)
> I have posted patches (which need an update [on my shorter TODO] that
> implement the availability attribute). That makes a fix unnecessary - I
> would much
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115880
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||10.4.0, 11.4.0, 12.3.0,
Priority: P3
Component: target
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
CC: iains at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Target: x86_64-apple-darwin
Testcase:
$ cat cf_include.c
#include
$
My
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115735
--- Comment #12 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to David Malcolm from comment #9)
> Note that the POSIX list might not be redistributable, and the stuff in
> glibc is probably under the GFDL rather than the GPL. Using glibc's is
> probably
||a/show_bug.cgi?id=15338
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #5 from Eric Gallager ---
See also bug 15338 for another issue with the compiler failing to know enough
about syslog()
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115684
--- Comment #5 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #4)
> C++ has -Wzero-as-null-pointer-constant .
> Maybe it should be added for C also for at least C23 where nullptr exists
> now.
>
> Note for C++, the enum value
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115684
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78352
--- Comment #31 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to Sergey Fedorov from comment #29)
> (In reply to Eric Gallager from comment #25)
> > Cross-referencing against
> > https://github.com/apple/swift-corelibs-libdispatch/issues/765
>
> By the way,
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P3
Component: analyzer
Assignee: dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
I brought this up on IRC previously, but since I can't remember when, I'll
rewrite it the best I can here
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48839
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||valsiterb at gmail dot com
--- Comment
|--- |DUPLICATE
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to valsiterb from comment #0)
> I was working on a 20 years old codebase and in order to increase
> compilation speed, I've converted all
||dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org,
||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed||2024-06-26
--- Comment #1 from Eric Gallager ---
Confirmed, I've seen this too
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80528
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||collin.funk1 at gmail dot com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78352
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||fjahanian at apple dot com,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78352
--- Comment #26 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to Eric Gallager from comment #25)
> Cross-referencing against
> https://github.com/apple/swift-corelibs-libdispatch/issues/765
Note that there is some confusion in that issue about if/when
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=951
--- Comment #15 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #14)
> (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #13)
> > (In reply to Eric Gallager from comment #12)
> > > Patch posted that might help with this a little bit:
> > >
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71176
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98819
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28492
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|-Wmissing-format-attribute |-Wsuggest-attribute=format
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47081
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jsm28 at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115391
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112422
--- Comment #4 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to Sam James from comment #3)
> There's some stuff we could cache for sure but it wouldn't be the majority
> of the checks - stuff like finding tools like awk, sed should work
> regardless of
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115496
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102223
--- Comment #9 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to Federico Kircheis from comment #6)
> > are you expecting this to go under an existing warning flag, or a new one?
>
> Ideally -Wall, but there might already be some flags related to dangling
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106393
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org
---
||il/gcc-patches/2024-June/65
||4016.html
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
Keywords||patch
--- Comment #4 from Eric Gallager
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15694
--- Comment #4 from Eric Gallager ---
Also, there's a lot of `shellcheck` output for fixincl.sh, too; should I paste
it here?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40789
--- Comment #2 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to Eric Gallager from comment #1)
> did you discover this with cppcheck or by looking manually?
Also does -fanalyzer catch this?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37036
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu.org
---
||fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu.org
Assignee|egallager at gcc dot gnu.org |unassigned at gcc dot
gnu.org
--- Comment #7 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to Eric Gallager from comment #6)
> (In reply to Iain Sandoe from comment #4)
> > Created attachment 55084
|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Keywords||diagnostic
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #2 from Eric Gallager ---
Confirmed.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32911
--- Comment #8 from Eric Gallager ---
It might also be worth comparing against the attributes [[unsequenced]] and
[[reproducible]] proposed for the C standard:
https://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n2956.htm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115268
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115212
--- Comment #3 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #2)
> (In reply to Eric Gallager from comment #1)
> > I think there's another bug for this, but I can't seem to remember which one
> > at the moment...
>
> PR 88002
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115212
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77465
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115077
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93008
--- Comment #13 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #12)
> There's nothing fake about them, they are definitely inline functions as far
> as the language rules. But in some cases we don't want the compiler to use
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71482
--- Comment #9 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #8)
> (In reply to Eric Gallager from comment #6)
> > Another reason this warning might be wanted: name mangling and demangling of
> > global constructors has been
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93008
--- Comment #11 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to Jan Hubicka from comment #8)
> Reading the discussion again, I don't think we have a way to make inline
> keyword ignored by inliner. We can make not_really_inline attribute (better
> name
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101166
--- Comment #3 from Eric Gallager ---
The FSFE's REUSE tool could be helpful for this:
https://github.com/fsfe/reuse-tool
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99475
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||needs-bisection
--- Comment #8 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71482
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79341
--- Comment #78 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to Ilya Leoshkevich from comment #77)
> Apparently fixing the message in GCC will produce maintenance overhead [1].
> If that's not very important to you, I'd rather leave this message as is.
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114928
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79646
--- Comment #5 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to Abe from comment #4)
> Anybody who wants to chime in, but especially Eric Gallager: please let me
> know whether or not my patch looks good enough for submission to the
> gcc-patches mailing
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71760
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
|--- |FIXED
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to Eyal Rozenberg from comment #2)
> (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> > Looks to be fixed in GCC 10+.
>
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114588
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71482
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54254
--- Comment #7 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #5)
> *** Bug 90039 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Symbol for this one was _GLOBAL__sub_I__Z11print_tracev
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59518
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54254
--- Comment #6 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #4)
> *** Bug 56755 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
symbol from this one was _GLOBAL__sub_I__ZN4AMOS12ContigEdge_t5NCODEE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101713
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
||a/show_bug.cgi?id=102665
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #5 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #4)
> Something like should provided an error while configuring so much earl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66487
--- Comment #30 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to Eric Gallager from comment #29)
> (In reply to Alexander Monakov from comment #28)
> > The bug is about the issue of lacking diagnostics, it should be fine to make
> > note of various
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66487
--- Comment #29 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to Alexander Monakov from comment #28)
> The bug is about the issue of lacking diagnostics, it should be fine to make
> note of various approaches to remedy the problem in one bug report.
>
OK,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79341
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12411
--- Comment #10 from Eric Gallager ---
I think the dup is a point for reopening
||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
URL||https://gcc.gnu.org/piperma
||il/gcc-patches/2024-March/6
||48427.html
Status|WAITING
|--- |FIXED
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #11 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to dave.anglin from comment #10)
> Warning is fixed on hppa.
OK, closing as FIXED, then.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102824
--- Comment #13 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to Iain Sandoe from comment #12)
> what input is this waiting for at the moment?
>From checking the bug history, it looks like Martin Liška was the one to put
this in the WAITING status, which
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114496
--- Comment #3 from Eric Gallager ---
Maybe the update could be just to clarify the "EnabledBy" rules for the
warning? i.e., something like "-Wsign-conversion is only and will only ever be
enabled by -Wconversion in C, and we will never have it
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=951
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
URL||https://gcc.gnu.org/piperma
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=13756
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
URL|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109835
--- Comment #6 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to Sam James from comment #5)
> FWIW, after doing more of this work, I've decided I don't really care that
> much about this one.
>
> I still think FP mismatches are often worse, but there's
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42818
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106472
--- Comment #35 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to Дилян Палаузов from comment #34)
> Created attachment 57662 [details]
> Proposed patch
>
> This fixes the problem.
>
> I do not understand the build system to say, that this is the best
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66553
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55561
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
Last
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66487
--- Comment #27 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to Alexander Monakov from comment #26)
> RFC patch for detecting lifetime-dse issues via Valgrind (rather than MSan):
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105898
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|RFE: -fanalyzer should |RFE: -fanalyzer should
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113679
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53929
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80036
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70730
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113414
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67819
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89072
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105401
--- Comment #2 from Eric Gallager ---
putting the words "computed gotos" here for easier searchability
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37722
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78352
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://github.com/apple/sw
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113168
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113019
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112973
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
1 - 100 of 3697 matches
Mail list logo