gcc refuses to compile this admittedly completely useless code:
int main(void) {
if(0) "hello"[0] = 'H';
return 0;
}
with
bug.c: In function ‘main’:
bug.c:2: error: assignment of read-only location
Obviously, this assignment will cause problems if it is ever executed, and a
warning is a goo
--- Comment #12 from mrs at apple dot com 2006-05-19 06:09 ---
Ok, finished a:
configure --enable-clocale=gnu --with-system-zlib --with-demangler-in-ld
--enable-shared --enable-threads=posix --enable-haifa --enable-checking=assert
--prefix=/usr/gcc-4.2 --with-local-prefix=/usr/local
-
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.1.0 |---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27558
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-19 05:40 ---
One more thing, can you attach the preprocessed source?
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-19 05:39 ---
gcc: Internal error: Killed (program cc1)
You ran out of memory.
How much memory do you have?
People build PHP all the time.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27675
System: Linksys NSLU2 with OpenSlug - Linux slugdev 2.6.12.2 #1 Tue Sep 27
20:21:18 CDT 2005 armv5teb unknown
Gcc 3.4.4
DOwnload and unack php 5.1.2
./configure --prefix=/redh/bin/php --with-apxs2=/redh/bin/apache2/bin/apxs
starts compilation then
/ext/date/ -DPHP_ATOM_INC -I/redh/dev/php-5.1.2
--- Comment #11 from mrs at apple dot com 2006-05-19 04:01 ---
Ok, just finished a:
configure --enable-languages=c
native build for i686-pc-linux-gnu, worked just fine... I'll try an expanded
configure line next...
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27673
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.2.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27674
pc64:~/src/newtest/trunk/objdir> make -j3 all-gcc
cat: stage_last: No such file or directory
make: invalid option -- a
Usage: make [options] [target] ...
Report bugs to
make: *** [configure-build-libiberty] Error 2
make: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs
--
Summary: [4.2 Regression
--- Comment #5 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-19 03:06
---
Fixed in 4.2.0.
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Stat
--- Comment #6 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-19 03:05
---
Fixed in 4.2.
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status
--- Comment #4 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-19 03:01
---
Subject: Bug 27471
Author: mmitchel
Date: Fri May 19 03:01:14 2006
New Revision: 113902
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=113902
Log:
PR c++/27471
PR c++/27506
* typeck
--- Comment #5 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-19 03:01
---
Subject: Bug 27506
Author: mmitchel
Date: Fri May 19 03:01:14 2006
New Revision: 113902
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=113902
Log:
PR c++/27471
PR c++/27506
* typeck
--- Comment #10 from mrs at apple dot com 2006-05-19 02:11 ---
A stage1 cross compiler with --enable-checking=assert targeting
--target=i686-unknown-linux-gnu hosted on darwin doesn't seem to fail, nor does
a darwin native compiler with --enable-checking=assert. I've reviewed the
code,
--- Comment #9 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-19 01:40 ---
(In reply to comment #7)
> I'm building a cross compiler now...
Just try the testcases on a native compiler, there should be no difference.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27673
--- Comment #8 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-19 01:39 ---
The error message does not even make sense for either of the cases listed here.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27673
--- Comment #7 from mrs at apple dot com 2006-05-19 01:39 ---
I'm building a cross compiler now...
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27673
--- Comment #6 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-19 01:33 ---
Here is a testcase that fails for x86-linux-gnu:
struct hblk{int i;};
void GC_check_heap_block(register struct hblk *hbp);
void GC_check_heap_proc(){}
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27673
--- Comment #5 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-19 01:15 ---
I do get a failure like this in my bootstrap, just not with your testcase. I
will attach a testcase once I reduce it.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |A
--- Comment #4 from hjl at lucon dot org 2006-05-19 01:14 ---
Gcc is configured with
/net/gnu-13/export/gnu/src/gcc/gcc/configure \
\
--enable-clocale=gnu --with-system-zlib --with-demangler-in-ld \
\
--enable-shared \
--enable-threads=posix \
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-19 01:05 ---
Also this bug report is not that useful without how you configure gcc, etc as
all mentioned on the bugs page.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27673
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-19 01:04 ---
Which stage is this with?
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-19 01:01 ---
Hmm, this testcase works for me on x86-linux-gnu.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27673
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mrs at apple dot com
Component|bootstrap |
With revision 113891, I got
[EMAIL PROTECTED] libiberty]$ cat foo.c
typedef int __io_write_fn (void *__cookie, __const char *__buf,
int __n);
int
main ()
{
return 0;
}
[EMAIL PROTECTED] libiberty]$
/export/build/gnu/gcc/build-x86_64-linux/./prev-gcc/xgcc
-B/export/build/gnu/gcc/build-x86_6
--
kazu at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |kazu at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org
--- Comment #4 from Harmon dot Nine at gmail dot com 2006-05-18 23:04
---
Output from gcc command in previous comment was incomplete. Here is the rest:
End of search list.
/usr/local/libexec/gcc/i686-pc-cygwin/4.1.0/cc1plus.exe -fpreprocessed
reco-stack.ii -quiet -dumpbase reco-stack
--- Comment #6 from hjl at lucon dot org 2006-05-18 23:02 ---
This hack works for the testcase. But I don't know if it is the correct fix
or not.
2006-05-17 H.J. Lu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR fortran/27662
* trans-expr.c (gfc_conv_function_call) Restore the first
--- Comment #3 from Harmon dot Nine at gmail dot com 2006-05-18 23:01
---
Command that generated attachment (reco-stack.ii):
/usr/local/bin/g++.exe -v -save-temps -I. -I. -DNDEBUG -Wall -ggdb -O3
-fno-strict-aliasing -finline-limit=3000 -ffast-math -mthreads
-DGECODE_BUILD_SEARCH -c -o
--- Comment #2 from Harmon dot Nine at gmail dot com 2006-05-18 22:56
---
Created an attachment (id=11487)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=11487&action=view)
Pre-processed output of reco-stack.cc, a gecode source file.
reco-stack.cc is generating an internal compile
--- Comment #7 from neil at daikokuya dot co dot uk 2006-05-18 22:22
---
Subject: Re: variable previously declared `static' redeclared `extern' is
valid ISO C - 3.4 and 4.0 regression
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:-
> Hmm, I think this causes the following invalid code to be a
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:-
> Hmm, I think this causes the following invalid code to be accepted (but I am
> not sure if this is invalid code or not):
> enum in_section { in_toc };
> int f(void) { extern int in_toc; }
>
> --
> In 3.3 and before we got:
> t1.c: In function `f':
--- Comment #5 from hjl at lucon dot org 2006-05-18 22:21 ---
There are
2042 /* Zero the first stride to indicate a temporary. */
2043 tmp = gfc_conv_descriptor_stride (info->descriptor,
gfc_rank_cst[0]);
2044 gfc_add_modify_expr (&se->pre, tmp,
--- Comment #4 from hjl at lucon dot org 2006-05-18 21:54 ---
Also
atmp.6.dtype = 538;
atmp.6.dim[0].stride = 1;
atmp.6.dim[0].lbound = 0;
atmp.6.dim[0].ubound = 1;
atmp.6.dim[1].stride = 2;
atmp.6.dim[1].lbound = 0;
atmp.6.dim[1].ubound = 1;
atmp.6.data
--
kazu at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |kazu at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-18 21:38 ---
I have seen this also.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Compile something like this with debugging information:
if (func1 ()
|| func2 ()
|| func3 ())
Set a breakpoint on func1, and then use GDB's "finish" command to leave the
function. You'll be back on the first line of the if. Same if you finish from
func2. Nothing in the process of
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |minor
Target Milestone|--- |4.0.4
http://
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |minor
Target Milestone|--- |4.0.4
http://
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.0.4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27666
--- Comment #3 from hjl at lucon dot org 2006-05-18 21:22 ---
I got
atmp.17.dtype = 538;
atmp.17.dim[0].stride = 2;
atmp.17.dim[0].lbound = 0;
atmp.17.dim[0].ubound = 1;
atmp.17.dim[1].stride = 0; <- Shouldn't it be 1?
atmp.17.dim[1].lbound = 0;
atmp.17.dim[1].ubound =
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-18 21:19 ---
Combine is causing the code to turn into:
(insn 17 16 18 2 (set (reg:CCGOC 17 flags)
(compare:CCGOC (mem/c/i:SI (reg/f:SI 16 argp) [0 k+0 S4 A32])
(const_int 0 [0x0]))) 3 {*cmpsi_ccno_1} (nil)
--- Comment #2 from kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-18 20:41 ---
Actually, transpose by itself does the right thing. It is the
combination of matmul and transpose that is screwing up indexing.
A slightly modified version of your program gives
troutmask:kargl[290] ./z
1.0 0.0 0.0
--
reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot
|dot org
--- Comment #2 from patchapp at dberlin dot org 2006-05-18 20:05 ---
Subject: Bug number PR c++/27398
A patch for this bug has been added to the patch tracker.
The mailing list url for the patch is
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2006-05/msg00943.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzil
--- Comment #8 from paulthomas2 at wanadoo dot fr 2006-05-18 20:03 ---
Subject: Re: crashes in sra_walk_expr and emit_move_insn
tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
>--- Comment #7 from tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-18 16:36 ---
>Paul, you didn't ask yourself to the CC ls
/*
% gcc -O0 -march=pentium4 -o foo foo.c ; foo
ok
% gcc -O1 -march=pentium4 -o foo foo.c ; foo
bug
% gcc -O1 -o foo foo.c ; foo
ok
%
% gcc -v
Using built-in specs.
Target: i686-pc-linux-gnu
Configured with: /home/kate/test/gcc-4.2-20060513/configure
--enable-languages=c --prefix=/home/kate/tes
The following invalid code snippet triggers an ICE since at least GCC 2.95.3:
==
template void foo();
void bar()
{
foo();
}
==
bug.cc:1: error: expected identifier before 'operator'
bug.cc:1: error:
The following invalid code snippet triggers an ICE since GCC 3.4.0:
==
template struct A {};
template void foo(A);
==
bug.cc:1: error: expected nested-name-specifier before 'class'
bug.cc:1: error: tw
The following invalid code snippet triggers an ICE since GCC 3.4.5 / 4.0.3:
===
struct A
{
template static void foo () {}
template<>static void foo<0>() {}
};
===
bug.cc:4: error: explicit specialization in non-
--- Comment #4 from mrs at apple dot com 2006-05-18 19:29 ---
aka radr://4336222
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25802
The following code snippet triggers an ICE since GCC 3.0
(it disappeared in 3.3.[2-6]):
===
struct A
{
A(int);
};
void foo(volatile A a) { 1 ? a : 0; }
===
bug.cc: In function 'void foo(A)':
bug.cc:6: error: no matching
The following code snippet triggers an ICE since GCC 3.4.0
(and in GCC 2.93.x):
==
template struct A
{
struct B
{
struct C {};
};
};
template void foo()
{
class A::B::C X;
}
void bar()
{
foo<0>();
}
==
bug.cc: I
--- Comment #1 from hjl at lucon dot org 2006-05-18 18:24 ---
This testcase is derived from Tonto in SPEC CPU 2006.
--
hjl at lucon dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ot
--- Comment #4 from mrs at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-18 18:22 ---
Subject: Bug 7948
Author: mrs
Date: Thu May 18 18:22:12 2006
New Revision: 113888
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=113888
Log:
Fix up vla, vm and [*] sematics.
PR c/18740
P
--- Comment #7 from mrs at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-18 18:22 ---
Subject: Bug 18740
Author: mrs
Date: Thu May 18 18:22:12 2006
New Revision: 113888
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=113888
Log:
Fix up vla, vm and [*] sematics.
PR c/18740
--- Comment #3 from mrs at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-18 18:22 ---
Subject: Bug 25802
Author: mrs
Date: Thu May 18 18:22:12 2006
New Revision: 113888
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=113888
Log:
Fix up vla, vm and [*] sematics.
PR c/18740
Hi,
this code:
unsigned long f (unsigned char *P)
{
unsigned long C;
C = ((unsigned long)P[1] << 24)
| ((unsigned long)P[2] << 16)
| ((unsigned long)P[3] << 8)
| ((unsigned long)P[4] << 0);
return C;
}
compiles to this:
:
0: f9 2f mov r31, r25
[EMAIL PROTECTED] tmp]$ cat x.f90
program foo
implicit none
real(kind=kind(1.0d0)), dimension (2, 2):: x, y, z;
integer i, j
open (10, status="scratch")
write (10, *) "0.10E+010.00E+00"
write (10, *) "0.00E+000.10E+01"
rewind (10)
read (10,*) x
print
--- Comment #2 from krebbel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-18 16:59 ---
Thanks for your comprehensive debugging!
At first glance I would say reload should take a word_mode register and reload
the constant. The code added by your patch to legitimate_address_p says that a
single number is
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-18 16:51 ---
Confirmed.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCON
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu dot
|
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-18 16:49 ---
There are two different bugs here. The first testcase is a dup of PR 20681.
The second testcase is a dup of bug 25973.
Second those are not unused objects as they have side effects on their
constructors/deconstruc
--- Comment #7 from tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-18 16:36 ---
Paul, you didn't ask yourself to the CC lsit, so you missed Volker's comments.
--
tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #1 from matz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-18 16:07 ---
Like so perhaps. It fixes the ICE for me, but I've done no further testing:
--- s390.c.orig 2006-05-18 18:05:59.442621578 +0200
+++ config/s390/s390.c 2006-05-18 18:05:34.632630936 +0200
@@ -2731,6 +2731,9 @@ legitim
--- Comment #1 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-18 16:02 ---
Thanks for filing this.
--
tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-18 16:01 ---
I was able to reproduce yesterday; but I'm updating and rebuilding
just to be sure.
The bug is dependent on the order in which the .class files are read.
--
tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What
--- Comment #12 from dje at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-18 15:56 ---
Users are suppose to control the architecture and code generation through
-mcpu=XXX, which sets the architecture options in self-consistent ways for the
target. On Darwin, -mcpu=G5 sets -mpowerpc64; on Linux, -mpowerpc
The following testcase produces an ICE in subst_reloads, when compiled
with "-march=z990 -O2 -ftracer":
snip
extern int memcmp(const void *s1, const void *s2, unsigned long n);
extern int printf (__const char *__restrict __format, ...);
typedef struct
{
char
--- Comment #4 from falk at debian dot org 2006-05-18 15:47 ---
I did a regression test, I'll submit the patch tomorrow (I hope).
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27571
--- Comment #4 from paul dot richard dot thomas at cea dot fr 2006-05-18
15:43 ---
Created an attachment (id=11486)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=11486&action=view)
A patch to the patch
This fixes the problem with the patch, applied to trunk, that was reported by
--- Comment #5 from paul dot richard dot thomas at cea dot fr 2006-05-18
15:31 ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> Paul, I've looked at the patch and it looks ok. You don't seem to have posted
> it, at least it's not in the patch tracker. Did you find any problems
> associated with it?
I
--- Comment #1 from gcc at pdoerfler dot com 2006-05-18 14:56 ---
Created an attachment (id=11485)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=11485&action=view)
gziped preprocessed source that produces the ICE
gziped because it's too large. Sorry, don't know how to reduce this.
--- Comment #4 from tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-18 14:40 ---
Paul, I've looked at the patch and it looks ok. You don't seem to have posted
it, at least it's not in the patch tracker. Did you find any problems
associated with it?
--
tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
Using built-in specs.
Target: i686-pc-linux-gnu
Configured with: ../gcc-vect/configure --enable-languages=c,c++
--prefix=/usr/local/vect
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.2.0-autovect 20060518 (experimental)
/usr/local/vect/libexec/gcc/i686-pc-linux-gnu/4.2.0-autovect/cc1plus -E -quiet
-v -I/home
_Jv_CreateJavaVM calls the following code:
// Set up the system class loader and the bootstrap class loader.
gnu::gcj::runtime::ExtensionClassLoader::initialize();
ExtensionClassLoader extends URLClassLoader and calls addURLs() on it which
might trigger loading of lots of jar files, this in tu
--- Comment #3 from tbm at cyrius dot com 2006-05-18 13:53 ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> Index: alpha.c
> ===
> --- alpha.c (revision 113736)
> +++ alpha.c (working copy)
> @@ -7410,6 +7410,7 @@ alpha_does_function_
--- Comment #3 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2006-05-18 13:46 ---
I can confirm that mainline, 4_1-branch, 4_0-branch and stock 4.0.2 are fine
together with glibc2.3.6 (-static of course).
--
pcarlini at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
I get an "undefined reference" error when linking two files but that variable
is static. This only happens with gcc 4.2, and only when I enable both -g and
-O1 (or higher).
(sid)473:[EMAIL PROTECTED]: ~] cat test.c
static const char utf8_skip_data[1] = {1};
static const char * const gconf_g_utf8_
--- Comment #5 from matz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-18 13:24 ---
Fixed for good.
--
matz at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
--- Comment #4 from matz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-18 13:19 ---
Subject: Bug 27599
Author: matz
Date: Thu May 18 13:19:27 2006
New Revision: 113886
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=113886
Log:
PR target/27599
* config.host: Make assignments to
--- Comment #2 from philippe dot thibault at umontreal dot ca 2006-05-18
13:00 ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> This works for me with glibc 2.3.6 so closing as invalid.
>
You tried compiling static or shared? I have glibc-2.3.6-3 installed on my
workstation and it works only if I compi
--- Comment #2 from pluto at agmk dot net 2006-05-18 10:14 ---
3.3.6 doesn't report about 'control reaches...'.
4.0 and 4.2 not tested.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27654
--- Comment #1 from pluto at agmk dot net 2006-05-18 10:12 ---
#include
bool foo( bool b1, bool b2 )
{
std::string what;
std::size_t size = what.size();
if ( b1 && size )
{
if ( b2 )
return true;
els
--
reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.1.1 |4.2.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26757
--- Comment #6 from reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-18 10:08
---
Btw, you also added the wrong PR number for PR 18003 in the ChangeLog entries
and the testcase (namely PR18803), would you mind fixing this as well?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27411
--- Comment #5 from reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-18 10:04
---
Paul, in your patch, you added the wrong PR number (PR24711 instead of
PR27411).
Would you mind changing the ChangeLog entries?
Are you going to fix this bug on the 4.1 branch, too, or can we close the PR?
--
--- Comment #9 from reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-18 09:53
---
The testcase in comment #3 compiled with "-O2 -ftree-loop-linear"
still ICEs on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu.
--
reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #8 from jzhang918 at gmail dot com 2006-05-18 09:43 ---
With patch foo6.patch, I get:
gcc -c voodoo.i -o aaa/t.o -pipe
Assembler messages:
FATAL: can't create aaa/t.o: No such file or directory
src/vidhrdw/voodoo.c: In function âvoodoo_startâ:
src/vidhrdw/voodoo.c:262: i
--- Comment #11 from tbm at cyrius dot com 2006-05-18 09:34 ---
(In reply to comment #10)
> Mine.
Did you resolve your copyright problems?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25776
--- Comment #2 from aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-18 09:28 ---
[RFC][PATCH] is here:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2006-04/msg00266.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21061
$ cat null_ice.f90
print *, associated(NULL(),NULL())
end
$ gfortran null.f90
null.f90:0: internal compiler error: in gfc_check_associated, at
fortran/check.c:508
--
Summary: ICE on invalid use of NULL as an argument to ASSOCIATED
Product: gcc
Version: 4.2.0
gcc version 4.1.1 20060504
#include
bool foo ( int k )
{
std::string bar; // unused object. not detected.
switch ( k )
{
default:
return false;
break; // unreachable code. not detected.
Hi Joern, Hi Alex,
The sh64-elf toolchain currently fails to build from the mainline
GCC sources because it contains unsupported SH assembler:
./xgcc \
-B./ \
-B/usr/local/sh64-superh-elf/bin/ \
-isystem /usr/local/sh64-superh-elf/include \
-isystem /usr/local/sh64
--- Comment #1 from rmathew at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-18 07:36 ---
I'm not able to reproduce this problem with the current mainline (2006-05-18).
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27643
95 matches
Mail list logo
