http://groups-beta.google.com/group/comp.lang.c++.moderated/browse_thread/thread/3c449572456c8592
The test program:
#include
int distance(std::vector v1, std::vector v2)
{
return v1.size() - v2.size();
}
int main()
{
std::vector v1(3), v2(1);
int d = distance(v1, v2);
return 0;
}
--- Additional Comments From ian at airs dot com 2005-08-03 06:00 ---
I looked into fixing this on the 3.4 branch. There is at minimum a series of
patches which would have to be applied:
1) mklibgcc.in has to be changed to group all the EXTRA_MULTILIB_PARTS files for
a particular multil
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-03
05:59 ---
Mark as invalid.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESO
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-03
05:58 ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> Should this be revisited now that gcc-4.x has disallowed
> ternaries as lvalues? My users are somewhat mystified
> as to why they need to declare storage for integer
> constants w
--- Additional Comments From dank at kegel dot com 2005-08-03 05:53 ---
Should this be revisited now that gcc-4.x has disallowed
ternaries as lvalues? My users are somewhat mystified
as to why they need to declare storage for integer
constants whose address is never taken.
--
http://
--- Additional Comments From ludovic dot brenta at insalien dot org
2005-08-03 05:14 ---
Yes, I was mistaken: RM 3.3(23) says: "A subtype is an indefinite subtype if it
is an unconstrained array subtype, or if it has unknown discriminants or
unconstrained discriminants without defaults,
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-03
03:39 ---
I will let someone else deal with this for now.
--
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|pi
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-03
03:35 ---
Even though comment #17 is correct, it is not the full story (I have a fix for
the issue in comment #17).
The real problem is that we don't consider function decls as constants so
consider stuff we shoul
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-03
03:03 ---
The real problem can be seen with:
int f(void);
int h(void);
int g(int a)
{
int (*ff)(void) = f;
int (**g)(void);
g = &ff;
(*g)();
h();
(*g)();
}
we mark the value which we calling as escaping
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-03
02:50 ---
hmm, why are things being marked as call clobered when their addresses don't
escape at all.
Mostly:
D.1928_31, is dereferenced, its value escapes, points-to anything
which is the variable for the function
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-03
02:21 ---
This is related to the C++ PR 11224 which had the same issue but has already
been fixed in 4.0.0.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23113
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-03
02:17 ---
Subject: Bug 22132
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: apple-local-200502-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-08-03 02:17:44
Modified files:
gcc/cp
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-03
01:55 ---
Subject: Bug 22491
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-08-03 01:55:38
Modified files:
gcc/fortran: ChangeLog expr.c
Log message:
--- Additional Comments From jkj at sco dot com 2005-08-03 01:52 ---
FWIW, same problem occurs on UnixWare.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21291
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-03
00:49 ---
(In reply to comment #10)
> This is triggered by tree-ifcvt (which is enabled by -ftree-vectorize)
But it looks like not a vectorize or tree-ifcvt bug at all but a fold bug.
We get:
0 == 0 ? 0 : 3988292384
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-03
00:37 ---
Hmm, seems like anything after a "return" should be removed even before CFG was
created:
return D.1766;
goto ;
I think I might get around to implementing that but it might take me some tim
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-03
00:34 ---
I think this is a dup of bug 14258. GCC still implements the old using rules.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23211
template
struct foo {
typedef int itype;
typedef int jtype;
struct bar {
typedef typename foo::itype itype;
using foo::jtype;
itype i;
jtype j;
};
};
gets you:
~/ootbc/members/src$ g++ foo.cc
foo.cc:9: error: `jtype' does not name a type
Ad
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-03
00:16 ---
Fixed on the mainline now. I don't know what fixed it though.
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-02
23:53 ---
Testcase number 2 in comment #3 works fine on the mainline now.
The reduced testcase in comment # gives:
t.cc: In constructor C::C():
t.cc:25: error: definition in block 1 does not dominate use in block 3
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-02
23:51 ---
The ICE:
t.cc: In instantiation of A:
t.cc:4: instantiated from void foo(A*) [with T = int]
t.cc:13: instantiated from here
t.cc:8: internal compiler error: tree check: expected tree that contains d
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-02
23:40 ---
Also fixed in 3.4.5.
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.0.0 |
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-02
23:38 ---
Confirmed.
--
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |minor
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-02
23:37 ---
Confirmed.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
E
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-02
23:33 ---
*** Bug 23207 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23206
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-02
23:33 ---
This is a dup of bug 23206.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 23206 ***
--
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-02
23:31 ---
Fixed in 4.0.0, not a regression.
Reduced testcase:
class type {};
struct DataType : type {
struct _xsd_type {
typedef class DataType type;
};
struct type {};
};
--
What|Re
--- Additional Comments From dalej at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-02 22:57
---
Preceding patch fixes the ICE I was getting. The tests following the modified
area in find_reloads were
being skipped in cases where they weren't before (in particular, when output
reloads are not allowed,
--- Additional Comments From fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-02
22:34 ---
This seems related to libssp specifically since libgfortran configures fine (in
the same tree). Adding jakub to the Cc list.
--
What|Removed |Added
-B/mingw/i686-pc-mingw32/bin/
-B/mingw/i686-pc-mingw32/lib/ -isystem /mingw/i686-pc-mingw32/include -isystem
/mingw/i686-pc-mingw32/sys-include -O2 -g -O2conftest.c -v
Reading specs from C:/msys/1.0/home/FX/ibin/gcc/specs
Target: i686-pc-mingw32
Configured with: ../gcc/configure --prefix=/min
--- Additional Comments From dberlin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-02
22:19 ---
Subject: Re: alias analysis doesn't take into
account that variables that haven't their address taken can't alias
arbitrary MEMs
On Tue, 2005-08-02 at 19:19 +, amylaar at gcc dot gnu do
--- Additional Comments From flash at pobox dot com 2005-08-02 22:05
---
The patch looks good on the first of our files to elicit this bug. The
following line causes the ICE; the line
after does not.
/opt2/gcc401-chkall-9330/bin/g++ -g
../cpp/bugfiles/GCC_bugfiles/error/105106_j
--- Additional Comments From fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-02
21:31 ---
bonzini, you assigned the bug to yourself, but I haven't seen any patch or
comment to my proposed patch. I'm still looking for someone to okay that patch,
or propose a better way to do it. The number of pa
Compiler doesn't produce valid error message for the following test case, where
two arrays are not comformable.
program test
integer ::a(2,2)
real :: b(4,4)
a=1
b=2.0
b = b + a
end program test
There is a PR #19754 and a patch in this regard but the patch emits the correct
error message only whe
--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-02 20:57
---
I think it's valid.
--
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |rth a
--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-02 20:46
---
Fixed.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
--
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||accepts-invalid
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23208
procedure Test_12_5_1 is
generic
type T is private; -- should be type T (<>) is private;
package P is
end P;
type R (B : Boolean := True) is record
case B is
when True => Component : Integer;
when False => null;
end case;
end record;
package P
:
gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/compile: 20050802-1.c
Log message:
PR 23196
* explow.c (memory_address): Remove special-case for
virtual_stack_vars_rtx and virtual_incoming_args_rtx.
Patches:
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/gcc/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=gcc&am
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-02
20:09 ---
Reducing it fails on 3.4.x but not on the 4.0 branch or the mainline.
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-02
20:04 ---
Confirmed, with the reduced testcase, I think this is still a front-end bug,
the creating of the structs for
the common sections is wrong,
--
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Additional Comments From dir at lanl dot gov 2005-08-02 19:38 ---
I have rebuild gfortran again and reduced the test case as far as possible and I
still get the same error message -
[dranta:~/tests/gfortran-D] dir% gfortran -O -c zipp.f
In file zipp.f:6
COMMON /SIZ/ M4,IDUM4(
--- Additional Comments From dnovillo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-02
19:34 ---
Fixed. http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-08/msg00112.html
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From amylaar at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-02
19:19 ---
(In reply to comment #20)
> The improved aliasing was not reverted though which is what gets most of the
improvements and not
> the promote statics pass.
The scheduling testcase still suffers from insuff
--- Additional Comments From boris at kolpackov dot net 2005-08-02 19:18
---
Created an attachment (id=9417)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=9417&action=view)
testcase
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23207
$ g++-3.3 --version
g++-3.3 (GCC) 3.3.6 (Debian 1:3.3.6-7)
$ g++-3.3 -c tu-3.3.i
In file included from Basic_Deployment_Data.cxx:40:
Basic_Deployment_Data.hxx:633: internal compiler error: in pop_binding, at
cp/decl.c:1434
Please submit a full bug report,
with preprocessed source if appropriate
--- Additional Comments From boris at kolpackov dot net 2005-08-02 19:15
---
Created an attachment (id=9416)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=9416&action=view)
testcase
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23206
$ g++-3.4 --version
g++-3.4 (GCC) 3.4.5 20050706 (prerelease) (Debian 3.4.4-5)
$ g++-3.4 -c tu-3.4.i
In file included from Basic_Deployment_Data.cxx:40:
Basic_Deployment_Data.hxx:633: internal compiler error: in pop_binding, at
cp/name-lookup.c:392
Please submit a full bug report,
with preprocessed
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-02
19:13 ---
Subject: Bug 23164
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-08-02 19:12:54
Modified files:
gcc: ChangeLog tree-cfgcleanup.c
--- Additional Comments From ian at airs dot com 2005-08-02 19:05 ---
Now fixed on 3.4 branch. It was already fixed for 4.0 and later.
--
What|Removed |Added
St
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-02
19:03 ---
Subject: Bug 19300
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: gcc-3_4-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-08-02 19:03:46
Modified files:
gcc: Change
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-02
19:03 ---
Subject: Bug 14400
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: gcc-3_4-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-08-02 19:03:46
Modified files:
gcc: Change
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-02
19:03 ---
Subject: Bug 14940
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: gcc-3_4-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-08-02 19:03:46
Modified files:
gcc: Change
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-02
19:04 ---
(In reply to comment #19)
> The promote statics patch has been removed from mainline, so this issue is
> open again.
The improved aliasing was not reverted though which is what gets most of the
improvement
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-02
19:02 ---
I forgot to mention this works just fine for dwarf-2 because we emit the debug
info even though the
variable is not emitted.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23205
--- Additional Comments From dpatel at apple dot com 2005-08-02 19:00
---
Subject: Re: [4.0/4.1 Regression] [C++] debug info omitted for global const
variables
On Aug 2, 2005, at 11:57 AM, pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> You know what is better is just move to dwarf-2 instea
--- Additional Comments From amylaar at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-02
18:59 ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> > It is fixed via neither of the above but is fixed on the tree-profiling
branch via the IPA statics stuff which
> Kenney Zadeck is working on.
>
> This is also a related to PR 1
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-02
18:57 ---
Confirmed, this is because we "inline" the value of j and then remove the
variable but for some reason
dwarf-2 emits debuging info.
This is unit-at-a-time problem as you can reproduce it on the 3.4 branch
--
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[C++] debug info omitted for|[C++] debug info omitted for
|global static const |global const variables
--
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[C++] debug info omitted for|[C++] debug info omitted for
|global variables|global static const
GCC does not emit debug info for variable 'j' in following example, when stabs
debugging format is
used.
const int j = 4;
int foo ()
{
return j + 1;
}
int main()
{
int i;
i = foo();
return i;
}
--
Summary: [C++] debug info omitted for global variable
--- Additional Comments From gdr at integrable-solutions dot net
2005-08-02 18:07 ---
Subject: Re: [4.0/4.1 Regression] Using frexp with fabs produces negative
result
"reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| Here's a snippet from the manpage from hpux (as found
--
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |rth at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org |
Status|NEW
--
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Target Milestone|--- |4.1.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-02
17:39 ---
Confirmed.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
E
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-02
17:37 ---
I only get the following error/ICE:
t.2.f:3: error: statement makes a memory store, but has no V_MAY_DEFS nor
V_MUST_DEFS
substr.ktbuf = 1;
t.2.f:3: internal compiler error: verify_ssa failed
On the mainli
--- Additional Comments From dpatel at apple dot com 2005-08-02 17:21
---
Subject: Re: [4.0/4.1 Regression] debug info omitted for uninitialized
variables (stabs)
On Aug 2, 2005, at 10:16 AM, mark at codesourcery dot com wrote:
> It sounds sensible enough, but I really haven't studi
--- Additional Comments From uttamp at us dot ibm dot com 2005-08-02 17:20
---
(In reply to comment #7)
> Fixed.
Shouldn't the following test fail too with the shape conformance error message?
program test
integer ::a(2,2)
real :: b(4,4)
a=1
b=2.0
b = b + a
end program test
--
htt
--- Additional Comments From mark at codesourcery dot com 2005-08-02 17:16
---
Subject: Re: [4.0/4.1 Regression] debug info omitted for
uninitialized variables (stabs)
dpatel at apple dot com wrote:
> --- Additional Comments From dpatel at apple dot com 2005-08-02 17:12
> --
--- Additional Comments From dpatel at apple dot com 2005-08-02 17:12
---
Subject: Re: [4.0/4.1 Regression] debug info omitted for uninitialized
variables (stabs)
On Aug 2, 2005, at 10:00 AM, mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
>
> --- Additional Comments From mmitchel at gcc
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-02
17:11 ---
We do get a warning:
In file t.2.f:4
COMMON /SUBSTR/ NPHASE,NSUB,IDUM1,KURPA,KTBUF
1
Warning: Named COMMON block 'substr' at (1) shall be of the same size
--
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-02
17:10 ---
Another reduced testcase:
COMMON /SUBSTR/ NPHASE,NSUB
END
SUBROUTINE ZIPP
COMMON /SUBSTR/ NPHASE,NSUB,IDUM1,KURPA,KTBUF
NSUB = 1
KTBUF = 1
END
--
http://gcc.gnu
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-02
17:08 ---
I am thinking this is a fortran front-end bug:
reduced testcase:
COMMON /SUBSTR/ NPHASE,NSUB
END
SUBROUTINE ZIPP
COMMON /SUBSTR/ NPHASE,NSUB,IDUM1,KURPA,KTBUF
IF (NSUB.LT.0) THE
--
What|Removed |Added
CC||ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot
||org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
--- Additional Comments From mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-02
17:00 ---
Devang --
The DWARF-2 information looks correct to me, from the section of DWARF-2 code
that you posted in the original report for this bug. I know GDB doesn't print
the variable, but I don't think that's
--- Additional Comments From dpatel at apple dot com 2005-08-02 16:52
---
Subject: Re: [4.0/4.1 Regression] debug info omitted for uninitialized
variables (stabs)
On Aug 1, 2005, at 8:25 PM, mark at codesourcery dot com wrote:
> In any case, the problem is now either in the C front
--
What|Removed |Added
CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot
||org, dnovillo at gcc dot gnu
Here is a second bug that showed up when I tried to reduce the test case for bug
23201 -
[dranta:~/tests/gfortran-D] dir% gfortran -O2 -c zipp01.f
In file zipp01.f:42
COMMON /SIZ/ DUM4,IDUM4(4),NWPART
1
Warning: Named COMMON block 'siz' at
--- Additional Comments From dir at lanl dot gov 2005-08-02 16:45 ---
Created an attachment (id=9415)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=9415&action=view)
source that fails
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23201
--- Additional Comments From tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-02 16:44
---
(In reply to comment #5)
> (In reply to comment #4)
> > Two questions:
> > A) should there be a configure option for this?
>
> Actually we should detect if it is non complaint install and use the
install-sh sc
This error is showing up with several programs and it changes if I reduce the
program very much - I will add the second error that shows up as a seperate
report-
[dranta:~/tests/gfortran-D] dir% gfortran -O2 -c zipp02.f
In file zipp02.f:194
IF(LTEMP(K)) 59,58,57
--
What|Removed |Added
CC||ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot
||org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
--- Additional Comments From reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-02
16:05 ---
Testing a patch.
--
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |re
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-02
15:59 ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> Two questions:
> A) should there be a configure option for this?
Actually we should detect if it is non complaint install and use the install-sh
script instead.
> B) should '@(#
--- Additional Comments From rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-02
15:58 ---
Fixed.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-02
15:57 ---
Confirmed, please send the patch to gcc-patches@ with a change log.
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-02
15:54 ---
Fixed on the mainline.
--
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail|
--- Additional Comments From rsandifo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-02
15:46 ---
This is a bug in the i386 builtin expansion code. Testing a fix.
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From paulthomas2 at wanadoo dot fr 2005-08-02
15:44 ---
Subject: Re: gfortran X edit descriptor failure: test
f77-edit-x-out.f
fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
>--- Additional Comments From fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-02
>10:52 -
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-02
15:24 ---
Hmm, somone else have to verify if this valid or invalid code.
--
What|Removed |Added
GCC b
--- Additional Comments From doerfler at ieee dot org 2005-08-02 15:21
---
Has this PR been fixed by
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-07/msg01881.html
?
The latest snapshot
gcc (GCC) 4.1.0 20050730 (experimental) (gentoo x86)
succeeded with profiledbootstrap
Is PR 2
Hi.
The following code, that used to compile on the older gcc,
now rejects:
---
static char var;
int main()
{
asm volatile ("" :: "i"(&var + 1));
return 0;
}
---
with the following message:
---
asc.c:5: warning: asm operand 0 probably doesnt match constraints
asc.c:5: error: impossible cons
--- Additional Comments From dir at lanl dot gov 2005-08-02 15:17 ---
It works now. Somehow, I missed getting it the first time that I refreshed the
gfortran tree this morning.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23177
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-02
15:13 ---
I think this only effects 4.0.x.
--
What|Removed |Added
Component|gcov/profile
--- Additional Comments From dnovillo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-02
15:10 ---
Testing patch.
--
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |dnov
--- Additional Comments From tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-02 15:10
---
Sigh. Somehow the build chose a weird install program. Editing the Makefile to
use gnu install instead fixes it.
Two questions:
A) should there be a configure option for this?
B) should '@(#)$Header: /cvs/op
I tried to do a profiledbootstrap for sparc64-sun-solaris2.9 but ran into an
internal compiler error for reorg.c. I then profilebootstraped gcc 4.0.1 for
sparc-sun-solaris2.9 without error. But again I get an internal compiler error
for the file r.c below that I build by stripping down reorg.c:
Fo
--- Additional Comments From tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-02 14:53
---
No, there was nothing before I tried installing.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23198
--- Additional Comments From joern dot rennecke at st dot com 2005-08-02
14:47 ---
Subject: Re: - RFA: fix PR middle-end/23135: synthetic testcase
I have attached a testcase that triggers the bug on mainline for sh-elf
-m4 -O2.
/* Based on execute/simd-1.c, modifed by [EMAIL PROTECTE
--- Additional Comments From anton at samba dot org 2005-08-02 14:42
---
Created an attachment (id=9414)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=9414&action=view)
Updated patch
As pinskia pointed out, -fspeculative-prefetching is not selected.
--
What|Remove
1 - 100 of 153 matches
Mail list logo
