[Bug libobjc/26794] Checking for gthread causes configure script to fail

2006-03-22 Thread issac dot trotts at gmail dot com
--- Comment #19 from issac dot trotts at gmail dot com 2006-03-22 08:25 --- Subject: Re: Checking for gthread causes configure script to fail On 22 Mar 2006 06:55:53 -, pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- Comment #18 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot

[Bug tree-optimization/15911] VRP/DOM does not like TRUTH_AND_EXPR

2006-03-22 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #17 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-22 09:00 --- Yes, this sounds very reasonable. Is there a chance you can take a look and provide a rough implementation? I can take on the ball and try to fix remaining issues - but as I'm not familiar with the VRP pass a

[Bug c++/26788] optimization of expression templates not as performant as g++ 4.0.2

2006-03-22 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-22 09:12 --- If the salias-max-implicit-fields setting helps you then this is a PTA issue. I never hit PTA issues with the expression templates in POOMA, so it might be interesting to get a testcase for this. A testcase is

[Bug rtl-optimization/26780] Build fails while making ../../../unxlngi6.pro/slo/cellsuno.obj on LFS6.1, kernel 2.6.14.3

2006-03-22 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #5 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-22 09:17 --- Use 'dmesg' to see if the kernel ran oom. -- rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug target/26776] A stack frame can't be recovered when using large auto variable area.

2006-03-22 Thread inaoka dot kazuhiro at renesas dot com
--- Comment #3 from inaoka dot kazuhiro at renesas dot com 2006-03-22 09:48 --- 4.0.3 has a same problem. 4.1.0 has no problem. The following was a patch. http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-07/msg00533.html -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26776

[Bug target/26775] a stack pointer is not recovered correctly when using alloca.

2006-03-22 Thread inaoka dot kazuhiro at renesas dot com
--- Comment #4 from inaoka dot kazuhiro at renesas dot com 2006-03-22 09:49 --- 4.0.3 and 4.1.0 have a same problem. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26775

[Bug tree-optimization/25737] ACATS tests c974001 and c974013 do not terminate with struct aliasing enabled

2006-03-22 Thread ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #2 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-22 09:53 --- s-taasde.adb:Time_Enqueue is miscompiled at -O2, more specifically: Q := Timer_Queue.Succ; while Q.Resume_Time T loop Q := Q.Succ; end loop; -- Q is the block that has

[Bug tree-optimization/25737] ACATS tests c974001 and c974013 do not terminate with struct aliasing enabled

2006-03-22 Thread ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #3 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-22 10:05 --- I'm further digging but does this ring a bell to you, Richard? I guess we should have a few V_MAY_DEFs for SFT.115, right? # VUSE SFT.115_55; q_17 = system__tasking__async_delays__timer_queue.succ; #

[Bug tree-optimization/25737] ACATS tests c974001 and c974013 do not terminate with struct aliasing enabled

2006-03-22 Thread ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #4 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-22 10:28 --- Hum... perhaps I'm naive, but what's the point of creating SFTs for addressable variables? What's the mechanism that is supposed to add V_MAY_DEFs for SFTs of such variables when V_MAY_DEFs are added for the

[Bug ada/26796] [4.2 Regression] ACATS ICE c34002a c52005 spurious storage_error

2006-03-22 Thread ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #1 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-22 10:32 --- Not present on 20/03: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2006-03/msg01368.html Present on 21/03: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2006-03/msg01395.html -- ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

[Bug ada/26797] [4.2 Regression] ACATS c35507m cd2a23e cxh1001 wrong code

2006-03-22 Thread ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #1 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-22 10:33 --- Not present on 21/03: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2006-03/msg01395.html Present on 22/03: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2006-03/msg01449.html -- ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

[Bug c++/26788] optimization of expression templates not as performant as g++ 4.0.2

2006-03-22 Thread roebel at ircam dot fr
--- Comment #5 from roebel at ircam dot fr 2006-03-22 11:13 --- Created an attachment (id=11090) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=11090action=view) Results file for testcase As you requested I provide a testcase. It consists of 2 shell scripts that run the different

[Bug tree-optimization/21829] [4.1/4.2 Regression] missed jump threading after unroller

2006-03-22 Thread richard dot guenther at gmail dot com
--- Comment #9 from richard dot guenther at gmail dot com 2006-03-22 11:14 --- Subject: Re: [4.1/4.2 Regression] missed jump threading after unroller On 3/21/06, Jeffrey A Law [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It turns out this specialized PHI optimization pass is as effective as running

[Bug c++/26788] optimization of expression templates not as performant as g++ 4.0.2

2006-03-22 Thread roebel at ircam dot fr
--- Comment #6 from roebel at ircam dot fr 2006-03-22 11:14 --- Created an attachment (id=11091) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=11091action=view) master shell script for comments see 11090: Results file for testcase --

[Bug c++/26788] optimization of expression templates not as performant as g++ 4.0.2

2006-03-22 Thread roebel at ircam dot fr
--- Comment #7 from roebel at ircam dot fr 2006-03-22 11:15 --- Created an attachment (id=11092) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=11092action=view) single experiment shell script for comments see 11090: Results file for testcase --

[Bug c++/26788] optimization of expression templates not as performant as g++ 4.0.2

2006-03-22 Thread roebel at ircam dot fr
--- Comment #8 from roebel at ircam dot fr 2006-03-22 11:16 --- Created an attachment (id=11093) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=11093action=view) testcase source file for comments see 11090: Results file for testcase --

[Bug tree-optimization/25737] ACATS tests c974001 and c974013 do not terminate with struct aliasing enabled

2006-03-22 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #5 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-22 11:17 --- Danny might have an idea and/or time to look at this. -- rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug tree-optimization/25737] ACATS tests c974001 and c974013 do not terminate with struct aliasing enabled

2006-03-22 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #6 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-22 11:19 --- I guess (only guess!) that the types differe in a way that aliasing does not see them clobbered by means of type based alias analysis. Can you try if -fno-strict-aliasing fixes it? --

[Bug c++/26799] New: Type deduction of a pointer-to-member

2006-03-22 Thread wolfgang dot roehrl at gi-de dot com
Dear all, I would like to post a bug report for the GNU C/C++ compiler 3.3-e500. We use the compiler to generate code for a PowerPC processor. Used invokation line for the GNU C++ compiler: ccppc -c -x c++ -ansi -Wall -Werror -mcpu=8540 -fverbose-asm -mbig -fmerge-templates -mmultiple

[Bug c++/26788] optimization of expression templates not as performant as g++ 4.0.2

2006-03-22 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #9 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-22 11:39 --- This is another case of find_used_portions missing explicit uses due to C++ and lots of inlining without any cleanup after that. And inserting cleanup being difficult because structure-aliasing pass running before

[Bug c++/26788] optimization of expression templates not as performant as g++ 4.0.2

2006-03-22 Thread roebel at ircam dot fr
--- Comment #10 from roebel at ircam dot fr 2006-03-22 11:55 --- Not that I understand what you just said, but, I wanted to mention, that in contrast to my initial email the data I just sent indicates a small performance penalty of about 25% for g++ 4.0.2 for large vectors on a

[Bug c/26800] New: ARM: creates 'strd' instructions for unaligned addresses

2006-03-22 Thread enrico dot scholz at informatik dot tu-chemnitz dot de
gcc creates 'strd' instructions which are accessing non-double-word aligned addresses. This is forbidden accordingly ARM Reference Manual and causes an alignment exception: | 10.6.14 STRD | However, the address of the first of the two words is required to be | doubleword-aligned (that is, the

[Bug c/26800] ARM: creates 'strd' instructions for unaligned addresses

2006-03-22 Thread rearnsha at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #1 from rearnsha at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-22 12:15 --- Invalid. The AAPCS requires 8-byte alignment of double-word objects (and, recursively any object containing such an object). Your struct contains a long long, which is a double-word object. See

[Bug c/18050] -Wsequence-point reports false positives

2006-03-22 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #6 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-22 12:19 --- Another one: int foo(int i) { i = ++i; return i; } I think the point is we should not warn for pre-increment, only post-increment. Or can someone come up with a testcase that has undefined evaluation order

[Bug c/18050] -Wsequence-point reports false positives

2006-03-22 Thread joseph at codesourcery dot com
--- Comment #7 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2006-03-22 12:26 --- Subject: Re: -Wsequence-point reports false positives On Wed, 22 Mar 2006, rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote: i = ++i; Modified twice between sequence points, so undefined behavior. I think the point is

[Bug fortran/26801] New: -fbounds-check generates segfault

2006-03-22 Thread sfilippone at uniroma2 dot it
Attached program generates a segfault when compiled with bounds-check enabled. There is nothing strange in the code that I can see (though of course I might be proven wrong). [EMAIL PROTECTED] sfilippo]$ gfortran -v Using built-in specs. Target: i686-pc-linux-gnu Configured with:

[Bug c++/26084] ICE (segfault) on C++ OpenMP code

2006-03-22 Thread rth at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #13 from rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-22 12:33 --- Mine. -- rth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|dnovillo at gcc

[Bug fortran/26801] -fbounds-check generates segfault

2006-03-22 Thread sfilippone at uniroma2 dot it
--- Comment #1 from sfilippone at uniroma2 dot it 2006-03-22 12:34 --- Created an attachment (id=11094) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=11094action=view) test case Note: the code segfaults even if the first do loop (before allocating the %a components) is commented

[Bug middle-end/26084] ICE (segfault) on C++ OpenMP code

2006-03-22 Thread rth at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #14 from rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-22 12:50 --- Subject: Bug 26084 Author: rth Date: Wed Mar 22 12:50:45 2006 New Revision: 112283 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=112283 Log: PR middle-end/26084 * except.c

[Bug middle-end/26084] ICE (segfault) on C++ OpenMP code

2006-03-22 Thread rth at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #15 from rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-22 12:53 --- Fixed. -- rth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED

[Bug c/18050] -Wsequence-point reports false positives

2006-03-22 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #8 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-22 12:53 --- Sure - but this doesn't matter in this case. And 6.5.3.1 tells you The expression ++E is equivalent to (E+=1). 6.5.16 says The side effect of updating the stored value of the left operand shall occur

[Bug c/18050] -Wsequence-point reports false positives

2006-03-22 Thread schwab at suse dot de
--- Comment #9 from schwab at suse dot de 2006-03-22 13:08 --- (In reply to comment #8) i = (i += 1); where for i += 1 the next sequence point is the i = ... assigment? The next sequence point is the semicolon. Of course for the particular testcase the ordering of the two stores

[Bug libfortran/26802] New: gfortran.dg/pr16597.f90 leaves behind a file

2006-03-22 Thread ghazi at gcc dot gnu dot org
The existing testcase gfortran.dg/pr16597.f90 leaves behind a file named fort.99 and should not do so. (If you run the entire testsuite, you have to run the testcase manually to see fort.99 because later tests reuse the same filename and delete it.) Looking at the code, the last time the file is

[Bug tree-optimization/21829] [4.1/4.2 Regression] missed jump threading after unroller

2006-03-22 Thread law at redhat dot com
--- Comment #10 from law at redhat dot com 2006-03-22 14:01 --- Subject: Re: [4.1/4.2 Regression] missed jump threading after unroller On Wed, 2006-03-22 at 12:14 +0100, Richard Guenther wrote: On 3/21/06, Jeffrey A Law [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It turns out this specialized

[Bug libfortran/26802] gfortran.dg/pr16597.f90 leaves behind a file

2006-03-22 Thread fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #1 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-22 14:03 --- Not a bug. The first OPEN has neither FILE nor STATUS='SCRATCH' specifier, so it creates a file named fort.99 in the cwd. This is the expected behaviour. The testcase should probably have a STATUS='SCRATCH'

[Bug tree-optimization/26804] New: Alias Time explosion

2006-03-22 Thread amacleod at redhat dot com
Alias analysis is taking a long time now. I seem to have narrowed it down to this patch: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2006-01/msg00908.html running cpgram.ii shows a regression: before patch: tree alias analysis : 2.49 ( 7%) usr 0.25 ( 5%) sys 6.13 ( 5%) wall 4971 kB (

[Bug tree-optimization/26804] Alias Time explosion

2006-03-22 Thread amacleod at redhat dot com
--- Comment #1 from amacleod at redhat dot com 2006-03-22 14:17 --- Created an attachment (id=11095) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=11095action=view) large c++ include file. cpgram.ii which compiles with -fpermissive --

[Bug fortran/26769] TRANSPOSE() requires _gfortran_transpose_i10 for REAL(10) arrays

2006-03-22 Thread tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org
-- tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot |dot org

[Bug middle-end/26084] ICE (segfault) on C++ OpenMP code

2006-03-22 Thread martin at mpa-garching dot mpg dot de
/configure --quiet --prefix=/afs/mpa/data/martin/ugcc --enable-languages=c++,fortran --with-gmp=/usr/local/appl/gmp-4.1.4 --enable-checking=release --without-makeinfo --disable-tls Thread model: posix gcc version 4.2.0 20060322 (experimental) /afs/mpa/data/martin/ugcc/libexec/gcc/i686-pc-linux-gnu

[Bug tree-optimization/26804] Alias Time explosion

2006-03-22 Thread dberlin at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #2 from dberlin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-22 14:58 --- Mine -- dberlin at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|unassigned

[Bug tree-optimization/21829] [4.1/4.2 Regression] missed jump threading after unroller

2006-03-22 Thread richard dot guenther at gmail dot com
--- Comment #11 from richard dot guenther at gmail dot com 2006-03-22 15:06 --- Subject: Re: [4.1/4.2 Regression] missed jump threading after unroller On 3/22/06, Jeffrey A Law [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, 2006-03-22 at 12:14 +0100, Richard Guenther wrote: On 3/21/06, Jeffrey

[Bug libstdc++/26777] sync_with_stdio(false) triggers bug with sgetc and pubseekoff

2006-03-22 Thread pcarlini at suse dot de
--- Comment #6 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2006-03-22 15:15 --- Fixed for 4.2.0. -- pcarlini at suse dot de changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED

[Bug c++/26799] Type deduction of a pointer-to-member

2006-03-22 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-22 15:35 --- I get a different error message on the mainline: t7.cc:19: error: no matching function for call to ‘ABC::ABC(void (DEF::*)()const, DEF)’ t7.cc:4: note: candidates are: ABC::ABC(const ABC) --

[Bug c++/26799] Type deduction of a pointer-to-member

2006-03-22 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-22 15:36 --- Fixed in 4.0.0, the error message is the same as in comment #1. -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug tree-optimization/21829] [4.1/4.2 Regression] missed jump threading after unroller

2006-03-22 Thread law at redhat dot com
--- Comment #12 from law at redhat dot com 2006-03-22 15:36 --- Subject: Re: [4.1/4.2 Regression] missed jump threading after unroller On Wed, 2006-03-22 at 16:06 +0100, Richard Guenther wrote: ; see tv_id - so I guess increased CCP times are expected. Nuts. I should have

[Bug libstdc++/6702] requirements for wchar_t support are too restrictive for Solaris

2006-03-22 Thread gcc-bklyn at sneakemail dot com
--- Comment #19 from gcc-bklyn at sneakemail dot com 2006-03-22 16:04 --- This bug appears to have recurred in gcc 4.1.0. I have no wide string or iostream support on my brand-spanking-new versionof gcc, when this all worked fine with gcc 3.4.3. -- gcc-bklyn at sneakemail dot com

[Bug libstdc++/6702] requirements for wchar_t support are too restrictive for Solaris

2006-03-22 Thread pcarlini at suse dot de
--- Comment #20 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2006-03-22 16:11 --- (In reply to comment #19) This bug appears to have recurred in gcc 4.1.0. I have no wide string or iostream support on my brand-spanking-new versionof gcc, when this all worked fine with gcc 3.4.3. But frankly I

[Bug libstdc++/6702] requirements for wchar_t support are too restrictive for Solaris

2006-03-22 Thread pcarlini at suse dot de
--- Comment #21 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2006-03-22 16:23 --- Humm, maybe Solaris 2.10 is affected... -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=6702

[Bug tree-optimization/26806] New: ICE at gcc/tree-gimple.c:269

2006-03-22 Thread jb at gcc dot gnu dot org
The capacita benchmark, part of the polyhedron benchmark suite, fails with the ICE in the summary. BT: #0 0x080d0276 in is_gimple_reg_type (type=0x0) at ../../trunk/gcc/tree-gimple.c:269 #1 0x080d0519 in is_gimple_val (t=0xb7852fa4) at ../../trunk/gcc/tree-gimple.c:368 #2 0x083e60c0 in

[Bug middle-end/26807] New: FAIL: gcc.dg/torture/pr24626-1.c -O2 (test for excess errors)

2006-03-22 Thread danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org
At -O2 and above, Executing on host: /home/dave/gnu/gcc-4.2/objdir/gcc/xgcc -B/home/dave/gnu/gcc-4 .2/objdir/gcc/ /home/dave/gnu/gcc-4.2/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/torture/pr24626-1 .c -O2 -fno-show-column -S -o pr24626-1.s(timeout = 300)

[Bug tree-optimization/26806] ICE at gcc/tree-gimple.c:269

2006-03-22 Thread jb at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #1 from jb at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-22 17:10 --- Created an attachment (id=11097) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=11097action=view) Testcase Testcase that demonstrates the ICE. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26806

[Bug middle-end/26807] [4.2 Regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/torture/pr24626-1.c -O2 (test for excess errors)

2006-03-22 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
-- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot |

[Bug middle-end/26807] [4.2 Regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/torture/pr24626-1.c -O2 (test for excess errors)

2006-03-22 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-22 17:19 --- I bet this was caused by the IA64 scheduler improvements on 2006-03-16. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26807

[Bug libstdc++/6702] requirements for wchar_t support are too restrictive for Solaris

2006-03-22 Thread gcc-bklyn at sneakemail dot com
--- Comment #22 from gcc-bklyn at sneakemail dot com 2006-03-22 17:20 --- (In reply to comment #21) Humm, maybe Solaris 2.10 is affected... I am indeed on 2.8. What more can I do to debug this? I'll attach sparc-sun-solaris2.8/libstdc++-v3/config.log. --

[Bug tree-optimization/26806] [4.2 Regression] ICE at gcc/tree-gimple.c:269

2006-03-22 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
-- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||law at redhat dot com AssignedTo|law at redhat dot com

[Bug libstdc++/6702] requirements for wchar_t support are too restrictive for Solaris

2006-03-22 Thread gcc-bklyn at sneakemail dot com
--- Comment #23 from gcc-bklyn at sneakemail dot com 2006-03-22 17:23 --- Created an attachment (id=11098) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=11098action=view) gcc 4.1.0 sparc-sun-solaris2.8/libstdc++-v3/config.log Gcc 4.1.0 config.log from

[Bug tree-optimization/26806] [4.2 Regression] ICE at gcc/tree-gimple.c:269

2006-03-22 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-22 17:27 --- Confirmed, shorter testcase: module solv_cap integer, private, save :: Ng1=0, Ng2=0 contains subroutine FourirG(G) real, intent(in out), dimension(0:,0:) :: G complex, allocatable, dimension(:,:)

[Bug libstdc++/6702] requirements for wchar_t support are too restrictive for Solaris

2006-03-22 Thread ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #24 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-22 17:40 --- Confirmed on Solaris 7, 8 and 9, everything is fine on Solaris 10. -- ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug libstdc++/26810] New: error when building cross-compiler

2006-03-22 Thread scoton at gmail dot com
I successfully compiled binutils-2.16, configured gcc, and binutils, with --target=sparc64-sun-solaris-2.9 --with-headers=$path_to_headers --with-libs=$path_to_libs, but when I give the command make all, this happens: ... checking for ISO C99 support in stdlib.h... no checking wctype.h

[Bug rtl-optimization/25569] [4.2 Regression] FAIL: gfortran.dg/g77/20010610.f -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -funroll-loops

2006-03-22 Thread law at redhat dot com
--- Comment #13 from law at redhat dot com 2006-03-22 18:01 --- Fixed via today's checkin to loop-unroll.c -- law at redhat dot com changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug tree-optimization/15911] VRP/DOM does not like TRUTH_AND_EXPR

2006-03-22 Thread law at redhat dot com
--- Comment #18 from law at redhat dot com 2006-03-22 18:13 --- Subject: Re: VRP/DOM does not like TRUTH_AND_EXPR On Wed, 2006-03-22 at 09:00 +, rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote: --- Comment #17 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-22 09:00 ---

[Bug tree-optimization/26806] [4.2 Regression] ICE at gcc/tree-gimple.c:269

2006-03-22 Thread law at redhat dot com
--- Comment #3 from law at redhat dot com 2006-03-22 18:14 --- Subject: Re: [4.2 Regression] ICE at gcc/tree-gimple.c:269 On Wed, 2006-03-22 at 17:27 +, pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote: --- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-22 17:27

[Bug tree-optimization/26795] [4.2 Regression] ACATS ICE c37213d on x86 in valid_in_set, at tree-ssa-pre.c:1579

2006-03-22 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-22 18:16 --- VIEW_CONVERT_EXPRstruct c37213d__E90b__S95b___C_PAD[D.2494:D.2496](*B$P_ARRAYD.2768_872)[B92b.67D.2585_1027]{lb: 1 sz: 4} We have a VIEW_CONVERT_EXPR here is ok, the assert is broken. --

[Bug tree-optimization/26806] [4.2 Regression] ICE at gcc/tree-gimple.c:269

2006-03-22 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-22 18:19 --- (In reply to comment #3) Options/flags? I've been unable to reproduce this. Just -O2. -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug ada/26797] [4.2 Regression] ACATS c35507m cd2a23e cxh1001 failures

2006-03-22 Thread ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #2 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-22 18:48 --- The 3 failures have been introduced by the following change: 2006-03-21 Jeff Law [EMAIL PROTECTED] * tree-vrp.c (extract_range_from_unary_expr): Derive ranges for type conversions of a

[Bug middle-end/26807] [4.2 Regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/torture/pr24626-1.c -O2 (test for excess errors)

2006-03-22 Thread dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca
--- Comment #2 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2006-03-22 18:49 --- Subject: Re: [4.2 Regression] FAIL: gcc.dg/torture/pr24626-1.c -O2 (test for excess errors) I bet this was caused by the IA64 scheduler improvements on 2006-03-16. That's probably a good candidate.

[Bug tree-optimization/26795] [4.2 Regression] ACATS ICE c37213d on x86 in valid_in_set, at tree-ssa-pre.c:1579

2006-03-22 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-22 18:54 --- The problem is that is the following: Created value VH.637 for VIEW_CONVERT_EXPRstruct c37213d__E27b__S31b___C_PAD[D.1589:D.1591](*_init$P_ARRAY_101)[A28b.23_725]{lb: 1 sz: 4} vuses: (HEAP.76_1012) That

[Bug tree-optimization/26795] [4.2 Regression] ACATS ICE c37213d on x86 in valid_in_set, at tree-ssa-pre.c:1579

2006-03-22 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-22 18:56 --- (In reply to comment #3) The problem is that is the following: Created value VH.637 for VIEW_CONVERT_EXPRstruct c37213d__E27b__S31b___C_PAD[D.1589:D.1591](*_init$P_ARRAY_101)[A28b.23_725]{lb: 1 sz: 4}

[Bug libfortran/19303] Unformatted record header is 4-bytes on 32-bit targets

2006-03-22 Thread tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #22 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-22 19:09 --- Subject: Bug 19303 Author: tkoenig Date: Wed Mar 22 19:09:11 2006 New Revision: 112290 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=112290 Log: 2006-03-22 Thomas Koenig [EMAIL PROTECTED] PR

[Bug libstdc++/21405] Template inlines have global visibility

2006-03-22 Thread cristipp at excite dot com
--- Comment #18 from cristipp at excite dot com 2006-03-22 19:10 --- (In reply to comment #17) see the solution in 24660 I'm not sure I understand correctly: are all C++ template libraries supposed to add 24660-style machinery? -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21405

[Bug tree-optimization/26795] [4.2 Regression] ACATS ICE c37213d on x86 in valid_in_set, at tree-ssa-pre.c:1579

2006-03-22 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #5 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-22 19:19 --- The problem is the follow if is being hit: 2941 /* If OP is a constant that has overflowed, do not value number 2942 this expression. */ 2943 if (CONSTANT_CLASS_P (op) 2944

[Bug tree-optimization/26795] [4.2 Regression] ACATS ICE c37213d on x86 in valid_in_set, at tree-ssa-pre.c:1579

2006-03-22 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #6 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-22 19:26 --- I think I have a fix, removing this condition as this condition predates the change for overflow constants being gimple invariant. -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed

[Bug ada/26796] [4.2 Regression] ACATS ICE c34002a c52005 spurious storage_error

2006-03-22 Thread ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #2 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-22 19:27 --- The 2 failures have been introduced by the following change: 2006-03-20 Jeff Law [EMAIL PROTECTED] * tree-pass.h (pass_phi_only_copy_prop): Delete. (pass_phi_only_cprop): Declare. *

[Bug driver/22600] Exit code should be different from 1 for internal compiler error

2006-03-22 Thread reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #10 from reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-22 19:36 --- Subject: Bug 22600 Author: reichelt Date: Wed Mar 22 19:36:22 2006 New Revision: 112292 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=112292 Log: PR driver/22600 * system.h

[Bug c++/26811] New: aix 5.1 won't compile mysql

2006-03-22 Thread cprincipato at dialamerica dot com
Making all in mysys if gcc -pipe -mcpu=power -Wa,-many -DDEFAULT_BASEDIR=\/usr/local/mysql\ -DDATADIR=\/usr/local/mysql /var\ -DDEFAULT_CHARSET_HOME=\/usr/local/mysql\ -DSHAREDIR=\/usr/local/mysql/share/mysql\ -DDEFAULT _HOME_ENV=MYSQL_HOME

[Bug fortran/17298] gfortran ICE: Not Implemented: Scalarization of non-elemental intrinsic: __transfer1

2006-03-22 Thread pault at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #11 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-22 20:00 --- Subject: Bug 17298 Author: pault Date: Wed Mar 22 20:00:17 2006 New Revision: 112293 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=112293 Log: 2006-03-22 Paul Thomas [EMAIL PROTECTED] PR

[Bug fortran/17298] gfortran ICE: Not Implemented: Scalarization of non-elemental intrinsic: __transfer1

2006-03-22 Thread pault at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #12 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-22 20:02 --- Fixed on trank and 4.1. Paul -- pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug fortran/26769] TRANSPOSE() requires _gfortran_transpose_i10 for REAL(10) arrays

2006-03-22 Thread tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #3 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-22 20:06 --- Created an attachment (id=11099) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=11099action=view) patch This patch adds the appropriate _r10 versions. It also includes the reversal of automake to 1.9.3 (which

[Bug testsuite/26813] New: Testsuite does not check for ICEs

2006-03-22 Thread reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org
The testsuite does not check for ICEs. Therefore, ICEs often go unnoticed when they happen in a line that is marked with { dg-error }. (See e.g. PR 24128, PR 26739, PR 26740 and several others). Btw, this is somewhat similar to PR 25241 DejaGNU does not distinguish between errors and warnings.

[Bug driver/22600] Exit code should be different from 1 for internal compiler error

2006-03-22 Thread reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #11 from reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-22 20:14 --- Fixed in mainline. I.e. the C and C++ frontend now return 4 if an ICE occurred, and a code less than 4 if a regular error occurred. (The Fortran frontend has been doing this already.) In order to see the exit

[Bug c++/26811] aix 5.1 won't compile mysql

2006-03-22 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-22 20:54 --- Fixed in 4.0.1. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 21173 *** -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug tree-optimization/21173] [4.0/4.1 regression] miscompiled pointer subtraction broke Linux kernel

2006-03-22 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #39 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-22 20:54 --- *** Bug 26811 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug testsuite/26813] Testsuite does not check for ICEs

2006-03-22 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-22 21:00 --- Confirmed, I was going to link the llibjava testing bug but you already found it :). -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26813

[Bug ada/26796] [4.2 Regression] ACATS ICE c34002a c52005 spurious storage_error

2006-03-22 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
-- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot |

[Bug ada/26797] [4.2 Regression] ACATS c35507m cd2a23e cxh1001 failures

2006-03-22 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
-- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot |

[Bug libstdc++/26810] error when building cross-compiler

2006-03-22 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-22 21:09 --- Look at config.log in libstdc++ subdirectory to see why it fails. The error message is misleading. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26810

[Bug fortran/26801] -fbounds-check generates segfault

2006-03-22 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-22 21:22 --- Confirmed, but I don't see could not figure out why the segfault is there. -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug tree-optimization/26795] [4.2 Regression] ACATS ICE c37213d on x86 in valid_in_set, at tree-ssa-pre.c:1579

2006-03-22 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #7 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-22 21:39 --- Full testing of my patch is happening right now. It worked for this testcase just fine. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26795

[Bug c++/26789] [4.1/4.2 regression] ICE on incomplete struct with -fmudflap

2006-03-22 Thread reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #3 from reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-22 21:42 --- Subject: Bug 26789 Author: reichelt Date: Wed Mar 22 21:42:34 2006 New Revision: 112296 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=112296 Log: PR mudflap/26789 * tree-mudflap.c

[Bug c++/26790] ICE with -fmudflap returning an incomplete struct

2006-03-22 Thread reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #3 from reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-22 21:45 --- Subject: Bug 26790 Author: reichelt Date: Wed Mar 22 21:45:13 2006 New Revision: 112298 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=112298 Log: PR mudflap/26790 * tree-mudflap.c

[Bug c++/26789] [4.1 regression] ICE on incomplete struct with -fmudflap

2006-03-22 Thread reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #4 from reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-22 21:58 --- Fixed on mainline. The testcase is still missing, though. -- reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added

Bug report - unrecognizable insn

2006-03-22 Thread James Steward
Hi All, Bug encountered building X. Probably already reported but I couldn't find any reference. I did google... Commandline.. make World CROSSCOMPILEDIR=/usr/local/arm-linux/bin X version XFree86-4.5.0, first 3 source archives only. Following instructions for configuring as per

[Bug c++/26790] ICE with -fmudflap returning an incomplete struct

2006-03-22 Thread reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #4 from reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-22 22:00 --- Fixed on mainline. The testcase is still missing, though. Will probably also be fixed on the 4.1 branch, since the patch is required for a complete fix of PR 26790 which is a 4.1/4.2 regression. -- reichelt

[Bug c++/24173] [4.0/4.1/4.2 regression] ICE with garbage collection

2006-03-22 Thread jonz at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #16 from jonz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-22 22:12 --- Subject: Bug 24173 Author: jonz Revision: 112262 Modified property: svn:log Modified: svn:log at Wed Mar 22 22:11:55 2006 -- --- svn:log

[Bug target/26776] A stack frame can't be recovered when using large auto variable area.

2006-03-22 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-22 23:03 --- Fixed in 4.1.0 then. -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug target/26775] a stack pointer is not recovered correctly when using alloca.

2006-03-22 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #5 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-22 23:04 --- Changing back to new then. -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug bootstrap/26814] New: Can't build a 64-bit C compiler on darwin-ppc

2006-03-22 Thread lucier at math dot purdue dot edu
Configured and built with #!/bin/tcsh /bin/rm -rf *; ../configure --prefix=/pkgs/gcc-4.1.0 --with-gmp=/sw/ --with-mpfr=/sw/ --with-as=/usr/local/odcctools-20060123/bin/as --with-ld=/usr/local/odcctools-20060123/bin/ld --enable-languages=c; make -j 8 bootstrap BOOT_CFLAGS='-mcpu=970 -m64 -O2 -g'

[Bug bootstrap/26814] Can't build a 64-bit C compiler on darwin-ppc

2006-03-22 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-22 23:23 --- This is the same issue as the follow patch tries to solve: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2006-02/msg01604.html So it is not just PPC-darwin. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26814

[Bug bootstrap/26814] Can't build a 64-bit C compiler on darwin-ppc

2006-03-22 Thread ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #2 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-22 23:24 --- If you start with a 32-bit compiler, the correct sequence of operations is: CC=gcc -m64 $srcdir/configure --prefix=/pkgs/gcc-4.1.0 --with-gmp=/sw/ --with-mpfr=/sw/ --with-as=/usr/local/odcctools-20060123/bin/as

[Bug bootstrap/26814] Bootstrapping with a non default ABI (-m64 on ppc-darwin or on ppc-linux with a compiler defaulting to 32 and now defaulting to 64)

2006-03-22 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-22 23:26 --- Actually this is talked about in the thread I pointed to, since the addition of toplevel bootstrap, GCC should be able to do this without any troubles. -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What

  1   2   >