--- Comment #9 from krebbel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-03 07:53 ---
Subject: Bug 25864
Author: krebbel
Date: Fri Feb 3 07:52:57 2006
New Revision: 110539
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=110539
Log:
2006-02-03 Andreas Krebbel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Comment #8 from krebbel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-03 07:44 ---
Subject: Bug 25864
Author: krebbel
Date: Fri Feb 3 07:44:12 2006
New Revision: 110538
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=110538
Log:
2006-02-03 Andreas Krebbel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Comment #3 from bje at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-03 04:06 ---
(gdb) p offset
$1 = 16
(gdb) p *last_view_index
$2 = 16
(gdb) p field
$3 = 0xf7ef9850
(gdb) pt
unit size
align 32 symtab 0 alias set -1 fields
pointer_to_this chain >
uns
--- Comment #9 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-03 03:57 ---
Fixed.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #8 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-03 03:56 ---
Subject: Bug 25377
Author: pinskia
Date: Fri Feb 3 03:56:55 2006
New Revision: 110537
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=110537
Log:
2006-02-02 Andrew Pinski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR ta
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-03 03:48 ---
Here is the backtrace:
#0 0x00664238 in df_find_use (df=0x41a06a70, insn=0x4281c4b0, reg=0x428a9780)
at /Users/pinskia/src/gcc/local/gcc/gcc/df-core.c:1030
#1 0x004a0418 in iv_analyze (insn=0x4281c4b0, val=0x428a97
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rakdver at gcc dot gnu dot
|
I was going to do a --enable-checking=release buil to test some compile time
preformance but I ran into an ICE. This does not happen on a
enable-checking=yes build because the source is different
but the testcase is reproduce there.
The last time the reduced testcase (and full source, ifcvt.c
--- Comment #2 from dnovillo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-03 02:48
---
(In reply to comment #1)
> Confirmed, I don't understand why Diego committed the full testcase and not
> the
> reduced one.
>
none of the reduced testcases were failing on my machine.
--
dnovillo at gcc dot g
--- Comment #25 from hp at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-03 01:49 ---
Also fails for mmix-knuth-mmixware. This is an ABI thing; callee copies if
it needs to modify (for MMIX, it's f() that does the memcpy).
Add testsuite framework or run only on specific targets, please.
--
hp at gcc
--- Comment #4 from jwray at google dot com 2006-02-03 01:30 ---
Sorry, my build environment had -Wno-return-type set, because of bug 20624.
This bug does apply to 2.95.3 though, but I imagine that won't be fixed. When
I tried with 4.0.1, -Wno-return-type disabled the warning. So neve
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-03 00:59 ---
Also the options I used to find the warning was "-W -Wall" which is the
standard warnings options I use.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26085
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-03 00:55 ---
Confirmed, I don't understand why Diego committed the full testcase and not the
reduced one.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-03 00:53 ---
Just to clearify I get a warning for f for those versions of GCC.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26085
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-03 00:52 ---
Which target is this for, I cannot reproduce this on powerpc-darwin or
x86_64-linux-gnu or i866-linux-gnu with 4.0.0, 4.1.0, 4.0.3 or 4.2.0.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26085
Executing on host: /mnt/gnu/gcc-3.3/objdir/gcc/xgcc
-B/mnt/gnu/gcc-3.3/objdir/gc
c/ /mnt/gnu/gcc-3.3/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/gomp/pr25990.c -fopenmp -O2
-std=
c99 -fno-show-column -S -o pr25990.s(timeout = 300)
/mnt/gnu/gcc-3.3/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/gomp/pr25990.c:9: error: complex.h:
No
Here's a simple repro:
struct s {
~s() {} // comment out this line to see warning
};
int f(s) {
}
int main() {
f(s());
}
It seems if a function takes a user-defined type that has a destructor, the
warning is inhibited.
--
Summary: missing warning on non-void function with no r
--- Comment #7 from rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-03 00:10 ---
*** Bug 25527 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
rth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #8 from rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-03 00:10 ---
The same bug that's affecting libgfortran is affecting libstdc++ -- we've done
a tail-call to a weakref function.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 25377 ***
--
rth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
--- Comment #1 from martin at mpa-garching dot mpg dot de 2006-02-02 23:48
---
Created an attachment (id=10774)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=10774&action=view)
unreduced test case
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26084
ase
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.2.0-gomp-20050608-branch 20060202 (experimental) (merged
20060202)
/scratch/ugccgomp/libexec/gcc/i686-pc-linux-gnu/4.2.0-gomp-20050608-branch/cc1plus
-fpreprocessed bug.ii -quiet -dumpbase bug.ii -mtune=generic -auxbase bug
-version -fopenmp -o /tmp/ccQCx6GI.s
GN
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-02 23:45 ---
Can you instead fix this now as this is a regression and really regressions
should not be left to the last minute any more.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25938
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-02 23:42 ---
I should note that the pthread calls are not from the config directories but
instead from the toplevel. This is just wrong.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25883
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-02 23:40 ---
Can someone please fix this bug, it is useless to get all these failures?
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--
amodra at bigpond dot net dot au changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |amodra at bigpond dot net
|dot org
--- Comment #4 from sje at cup dot hp dot com 2006-02-02 22:41 ---
These tests, along with g++.dg/tls/static-1.C are failing due to a bug in the
HP linker. The linker has been fixed but not yet released. The problem is
that the linker is using the SHF_HP_TLS (0x0100) flag for threa
--- Comment #8 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-02 20:22 ---
Reduced testcase:
struct _Unwind_Context
{
void *ra;
}
init_dwarf_reg_size_table (void)
{
struct _Unwind_Context this_context, cur_context;
__builtin_unwind_init ();
long offset = uw_install_context_1 ((&this
--- Comment #7 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-02 19:56 ---
Reducing.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25127
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25814
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |minor
Target Milestone|--- |4.0.3
http://
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-02 19:52 ---
Confirmed based on
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2006-02/msg00038.html
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-02 19:51 ---
Confirmed, more of the issue is really the documenation is more C based than
C++ based.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #4 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2006-02-02 19:49 ---
Fixed.
--
pcarlini at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-02 19:47 ---
Confirmed.
What should happen here is that when foo is not declared in this context, we
should try to figure out if it was going to be used as a type or a variable.
Right now we assume it is used as a variable.
-
--- Comment #5 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-02 19:41
---
Created an attachment (id=10773)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=10773&action=view)
Preprocessed md5.c source file
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25842
--- Comment #4 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-02 19:40
---
I tried again with 4.2 trunk, from 2005-01-31, and it still fails with the same
message. I will attach the preprocessed source md5.i, although I tried to look
into it and don't really understand why the ansidecl.h
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-02 19:32 ---
Reduced testcase on the mainline:
void __attribute__((const)) g(void);
struct variable_set{int i;};
struct variable_set_list
{
struct variable_set_list *next;
struct variable_set *set;
};
extern struct variab
--- Comment #1 from thebohemian at gmx dot net 2006-02-02 19:28 ---
Posted a patch to fix the issue:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/java-patches/2006-q1/msg00139.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26073
--- Comment #10 from thebohemian at gmx dot net 2006-02-02 19:26 ---
(From update of attachment 10771)
Forget about this patch. it doesnt compile and there is a working one on the
java-patches list.
--
thebohemian at gmx dot net changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #13 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-02 19:18
---
(In reply to comment #12)
> Is somebody working on this?
I am not (though it shouldn't take too much time, I'm positively squashed under
real life work). And, IIRC, the mips maintainers don't have access to IRIX
--- Comment #6 from kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-02 19:12 ---
Subject: Bug 24958
Author: kargl
Date: Thu Feb 2 19:11:58 2006
New Revision: 110517
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=110517
Log:
2006-02-02 Steven G. Kargl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR fort
--- Comment #2 from kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-02 19:12 ---
Subject: Bug 25072
Author: kargl
Date: Thu Feb 2 19:11:58 2006
New Revision: 110517
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=110517
Log:
2006-02-02 Steven G. Kargl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR fort
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-02 19:02 ---
This works on the mainline.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #6 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-02 18:51 ---
This works on the mainline.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Kn
--- Comment #22 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-02 18:47
---
*** Bug 26079 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-02 18:47 ---
The issue here (in the source) is that the overloaded of
"result += size(*iter);" is only the size functions above that call so it
does not see the template below that call which is the function you would like
to
--- Comment #1 from roger at eyesopen dot com 2006-02-02 18:43 ---
*** Bug 26080 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26079
--- Comment #1 from roger at eyesopen dot com 2006-02-02 18:43 ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 26079 ***
--
roger at eyesopen dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
The following short code fragment no longer compiles with gcc 4.1.
I've no clue if this a regression or mandated by the standard.
#include
#include
#include
int size(char x) { return (int) sizeof(x); }
int size(int x) { return (int) sizeof(x); }
int size(const std::string &x) {
return (int)
The following short code fragment no longer compiles with gcc 4.1.
I've no clue if this a regression or mandated by the standard.
#include
#include
#include
int size(char x) { return (int) sizeof(x); }
int size(int x) { return (int) sizeof(x); }
int size(const std::string &x) {
return (int)
--- Comment #6 from ian at airs dot com 2006-02-02 18:18 ---
With the version of RTH's subreg lowering pass which I am working on, I get
identical code for both functions:
test1:
movl8(%esp), %eax
orl 4(%esp), %eax
jne .L7
ret
.p2align
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-02 18:17 ---
Confirmed. Related to PR 26074
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Bu
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-02 18:16 ---
Confirmed.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCON
--- Comment #2 from ian at airs dot com 2006-02-02 18:14 ---
With an updated version of RTH's subreg lowering pass, I get this instruction
sequence:
f:
movl16(%esp), %eax
movl4(%esp), %edx
movl8(%esp), %ecx
shrl$16, %eax
andl$2
--- Comment #12 from r dot emrich at de dot tecosim dot com 2006-02-02
18:01 ---
Subject: Re: libgfortran build failure on mips-sgi-irix6.5
fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org schrieb:
> --- Comment #11 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-01-12 13:08
> ---
> This could b
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-02 17:58 ---
Actually this is invalid code:
"tclass::tclass(i);" does not what you think it does.
It declares the variable "i" as the type tclass::tclass.
Now "tclass::tclass" is invalid type anyways but that is a different bug
--- Comment #21 from rakdver at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-02 17:57
---
I have posted the patch, let's see what the reactions will be.
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2006-02/msg00146.html
--
rakdver at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-02 17:48 ---
Confirmed, reduced testcase:
void __muldi3 (long long u,long long v){}
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
---Code---
1 #include
2 using namespace std;
3 class tclass {
4 public:
5tclass();
6tclass(int);
7 };
8 tclass::tclass(int j)
9 {
10cout << j << endl;
11 }
12 tclass::tclass()
13 {
14int i ;
15i = 90
--- Comment #24 from sje at cup dot hp dot com 2006-02-02 17:16 ---
This test is also failing on hppa*-*-hpux* and ia64-*-hpux*.
--
sje at cup dot hp dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #7 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-02 17:14
---
Patch posted here:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2006-02/msg00133.html
--
rsandifo at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #20 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-02 17:13
---
*** Bug 26077 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-02 17:13 ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 8788 ***
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
The following invalid code produces an internal compiler error on 4.0.0. 3.3.0
and 2.95.2:
$ cat ros.i
struct s {
int x, y, z;
};
void f (struct s s) {
asm ("%0" : : "a" (s));
}
$ gcc-4.0 ros.i
ros.i: In function 'f':
ros.i:6: internal compiler error: in emit_move_insn, at expr.c:3092
Pleas
--- Comment #4 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-02 17:09
---
Patch posted here:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2006-02/msg00133.html
--
rsandifo at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-02 17:08 ---
Can you attach the preprocessed source?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26015
--- Comment #20 from matz at suse dot de 2006-02-02 16:56 ---
I've put the patch to testing.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24996
--- Comment #6 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-02 16:54 ---
Should be helped or almost ready to be fixed by:
http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/Section%20Anchor%20Optimisations
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9703
--- Comment #6 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-02 16:42 ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> (In reply to comment #4)
> No, that would not work as this SPECs is used for other things too.
> The correct way to fix this is to move the specs handling of defines to
> TARGET_OS_CPP_BUIL
--- Comment #5 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-02 16:39 ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> IMO it should be coded in the executable itself that -undef skips reading the
> specs at all.
No, that would not work as this SPECs is used for other things too.
The correct way to fix thi
--- Comment #10 from sven dot buijssen at math dot uni-dortmund dot de
2006-02-02 16:12 ---
They did with gfortran < Revision 108555. With current revision 110515 backing
out only the patch for 18197 (and not applying your patch) they do not.
The error message I get with revision 11051
--- Comment #4 from gerrit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-02 16:09 ---
IMO it should be coded in the executable itself that -undef skips reading the
specs at all.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26052
The following valid code snippet causes an ICE when compiled with -fopenmp:
=
struct A
{
~A();
};
void foo()
{
#pragma omp parallel
{
A a, b;
}
}
=
bug.cc: In function 'void _Z3foov.omp_fn.0(void*)':
bug.cc:8: internal compiler error: v
--- Comment #4 from gdr at integrable-solutions dot net 2006-02-02 15:12
---
Subject: Re: error and warning count
"pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| > IMO this is a useful feature because the number of lines of error output
that
| > GCC produces for a f
--- Comment #14 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-02 14:58
---
Patch posted:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2006-02/msg00130.html
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-02 14:56 ---
One may be able to teach forwprop about this optimization, i.e. turn
x = 1;
x.0_3 = (char *) &x;
D.1522_4 = *x.0_3;
into
D.1522_4 = VIEW_CONVERT_EXPR (x);
if that has the right semantics. CCP fold may t
--- Comment #3 from dnovillo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-02 14:53
---
Should be fixed with the patch for PR 25990.
--
dnovillo at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #9 from hjl at lucon dot org 2006-02-02 14:49 ---
If you back out the change for bug 18197, does several thousand lines of
code compile?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26064
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-02 14:42 ---
Subject: Re: error and warning count
>
>
>
> --- Comment #2 from hyperquantum at gmail dot com 2006-02-02 14:39
> ---
> IMO this is a useful feature because the number of lines of error output that
> G
>
>
>
> --- Comment #2 from hyperquantum at gmail dot com 2006-02-02 14:39
> ---
> IMO this is a useful feature because the number of lines of error output that
> GCC produces for a file is not (always) a correct measure for the amount of
> errors and warnings produced for that file. T
--- Comment #2 from hyperquantum at gmail dot com 2006-02-02 14:39 ---
IMO this is a useful feature because the number of lines of error output that
GCC produces for a file is not (always) a correct measure for the amount of
errors and warnings produced for that file. This is because GCC
--- Comment #1 from pluto at agmk dot net 2006-02-02 14:15 ---
on x86-64 I get:
f: movli.0(%rip), %eax
testl %eax, %eax
jne .L2
movb$2, %al
movl$2, i.0(%rip)
.L2:rep ; ret
$ pr24647.c.t97.final_cleanup
f() {
static int i;
i
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfi
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-02 13:53 ---
Confirmed, note vector here is a define for __attribute__((vector_size(16)))
and from the include of altivec.h as there is no vector long long in altivec.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
Wh
--- Comment #15 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-02 13:35
---
PR 26052 is the bug for cgwin.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
B
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-02 13:26 ---
Confirmed.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCON
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-02 12:58 ---
*** Bug 26072 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-02 12:58 ---
This is an exact dup of bug 19808.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 19808 ***
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #9 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-02 12:56 ---
PR 26073 is the PR for ffi usage that breaks ARM.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #8 from thebohemian at gmx dot net 2006-02-02 12:56 ---
Created an attachment (id=10771)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=10771&action=view)
a preliminary patch (not tested)
Unfortunately I am in a hurry and have to leave soon. If anyone depends on the
ARM
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfi
--- Comment #7 from thebohemian at gmx dot net 2006-02-02 12:52 ---
Changed the title and have a preliminary patch.
--
thebohemian at gmx dot net changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #16 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-02 12:41
---
Fixed in 3.4.6 now. Thanks for your report and helping out testing the patches.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|java|libgcj
Target Milestone|--- |4.2.0
http:/
--- Comment #15 from dnovillo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-02 12:37
---
Fixed. http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2006-02/msg00121.html
--
dnovillo at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #5 from ro at techfak dot uni-bielefeld dot de 2006-02-02
12:32 ---
Subject: Re: [4.1/4.2 Regression] Misdetection of COMDAT group support with
GNU as and non-GNU ld
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org writes:
> We could have a --enable-comdat option, or, as you say, we could
--- Comment #14 from dnovillo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-02 12:27
---
Subject: Bug 25990
Author: dnovillo
Date: Thu Feb 2 12:27:02 2006
New Revision: 110511
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=110511
Log:
PR 25990
* tree-cfg.c (move_block_to_fn)
--- Comment #6 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-02 12:10 ---
See java/lang/reflect/natMethod.cc:
#if USE_LIBFFI
#include
#else
#include
#endif
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26063
--- Comment #5 from thebohemian at gmx dot net 2006-02-02 12:06 ---
The ffi usage breaks the build on arm :(
Can someone tell me which macro I can use to test ffi availability?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26063
--- Comment #8 from sven dot buijssen at math dot uni-dortmund dot de
2006-02-02 11:30 ---
I tested the patch and encountered another internal compiler error. The
problem, however, is that this new error so far only occurs with a code
consisting of several thousand code lines and disapp
1 - 100 of 114 matches
Mail list logo
