--- Comment #10 from hubicka at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-30 08:00
---
Yes, it is harmless, so P4 should be better match. The test is checking that
loop disambugiation is done one way not the other way while both are correct
choices.
Honza
--
hubicka at gcc dot gnu dot org chang
--- Comment #28 from ktietz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-30 08:54 ---
(In reply to comment #19)
> Anyone else could test it, please?
ok, I tested it for linux64 and and for w64 without any new problems.
I applied the patch (see rev. #143780). Just the testcase is missing.
Do you apply
--- Comment #29 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-30 09:23 ---
Subject: Bug 39002
Author: jakub
Date: Fri Jan 30 09:22:48 2009
New Revision: 143782
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=143782
Log:
PR target/39002
* g++.dg/torture/pr39002.C: New
--- Comment #30 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-30 09:29 ---
Fixed.
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #1 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2009-01-30 09:56 ---
You can workaround this PE/COFF problem with -fno-common.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 37216 ***
--
ubizjak at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #51 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2009-01-30 09:56 ---
*** Bug 39039 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
ubizjak at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #5 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2009-01-30 10:01 ---
The posted patch seems wrong, since the test is testing chmod you should use
stat to check the result.
--
bonzini at gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from hariharans at picochip dot com 2009-01-30 10:04 ---
Index: gcc/common.opt
===
--- gcc/common.opt (revision 143749)
+++ gcc/common.opt (working copy)
@@ -386,7 +386,7 @@
Do not put uninitialized
--- Comment #4 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-01-30 10:18
---
The diagnostic issue is trivial, just add a check for error_mark_node on the
return value of reshape_init_r, consistently with other calls.
However, I'm still analyzing whether we really want to reject. As dat
The attached file causes an ICE with gcc-4.3.2 and gcc-4.3.3 on at least two
targets (ix86 Linux and Blackfin) when compiled with -O2.
bug.i: In function 'foo':
bug.i:18: internal compiler error: in get_addr_dereference_operands, at
tree-ssa-operands.c:1698
This happens during the vrp2 pass:
ber
--- Comment #1 from bernds_cb1 at t-online dot de 2009-01-30 10:51 ---
Created an attachment (id=17212)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=17212&action=view)
Testcase to reproduce the problem.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39041
--- Comment #13 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-30 10:58 ---
Nothing changed in gsf-scan.c, but out of the 3 objects in libgsf.so that
changed it seems to be gsf-output-csv.c where r143570 makes difference for
gsf-scan. Looking at it now...
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
--- Comment #14 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-30 11:38 ---
And clearly the bug is in libgsf, not in gcc.
g_enum_register_static documentation says:
GObject keeps a reference to the data, so it cannot be stack-allocated.
so this relies on this optimization. gsf_output_csv_quo
--- Comment #15 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-30 11:39 ---
Created an attachment (id=17213)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=17213&action=view)
libgsf-enum-register.patch
Patch that fixes this.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39015
--- Comment #16 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-30 11:40 ---
Invalid.
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
--- Comment #1 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-30 11:48 ---
For very recent glibc this has been fixed with
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=143773
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30928
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
Last re
--- Comment #2 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-01-30 12:08
---
*** Bug 33935 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-01-30 12:08
---
This is really the same as libstdc++/30928.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 30928 ***
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-30 13:39 ---
Confirmed. There's a type mismatch in the substituted statement:
pretmp.27_29 = *&cpumask.bits[0]
arg 1
arg 0
constant invariant
arg 0
arg 0
--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-30 13:46 ---
I have a patch.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|
--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-30 13:47 ---
4.2 works, the problem is latent in 4.4
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #12 from dcb314 at hotmail dot com 2009-01-30 13:48 ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> Yes this would be slightly useful but one has to be care full of what is
> warned about.
Agreed. For a first cut, a simple straight forward job, without
considering the complex cases, could b
--- Comment #6 from hjl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-30 14:14 ---
Subject: Bug 38995
Author: hjl
Date: Fri Jan 30 14:13:50 2009
New Revision: 143789
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=143789
Log:
gcc/
2009-01-30 H.J. Lu
PR lto/38995
* langhooks
I have 10GB free space in /tmp. But it isn't enough to run
"make check" because LTO tests don't cleanup after run. It
leads to many false alarms and make my machine unusable.
--
Summary: [LTO] LTO tests don't cleanup temporary files
Product: gcc
Version: 4.4.0
--- Comment #5 from bangerth at gmail dot com 2009-01-30 15:00 ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> However, I'm still analyzing whether we really want to reject. As data points,
> ICC doesn't, even in strict mode; on the other hand Comeau rejects the
> identifier "family" already...
Does it
--- Comment #2 from paolo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-30 15:03 ---
Subject: Bug 33465
Author: paolo
Date: Fri Jan 30 15:03:10 2009
New Revision: 143790
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=143790
Log:
/cp
2009-01-30 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/33465
* e
--- Comment #1 from paolo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-30 15:03 ---
Subject: Bug 38655
Author: paolo
Date: Fri Jan 30 15:03:10 2009
New Revision: 143790
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=143790
Log:
/cp
2009-01-30 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/33465
* e
--- Comment #3 from bangerth at gmail dot com 2009-01-30 15:03 ---
This is probably related to PR 2288.
--
bangerth at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-01-30 15:05
---
Fixed for 4.4.0.
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from bangerth at gmail dot com 2009-01-30 15:05 ---
*** Bug 39038 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
bangerth at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #4 from bangerth at gmail dot com 2009-01-30 15:05 ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 18770 ***
--
bangerth at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-01-30 15:05
---
Fixed for 4.4.0.
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from bangerth at gmail dot com 2009-01-30 15:13 ---
Yes, I think this would be an optimizing compiler could potentially perform.
At the same time I think you are expecting too much from the compiler: it
would have to have a semantic understanding of what the strlen functio
--- Comment #1 from bangerth at gmail dot com 2009-01-30 15:20 ---
Confirmed. The original testcase had a function argument of type
pointer-to-pointer-to-array-of-unknown-size, but this testcase
also fails:
template
bool f (T_ p);
bool g ()
{ return f(0); }
--
bangerth at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
--- Comment #1 from bangerth at gmail dot com 2009-01-30 15:23 ---
Confirmed.
--
bangerth at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED
--- Comment #1 from bangerth at gmail dot com 2009-01-30 15:27 ---
Confirmed. This used to work in 4.1 where we got the following error
(which does not earn the prize for the prettiest error message ever):
g/x> /home/bangerth/bin/gcc-4.1.1/bin/c++ -c x.cc
x.cc: In function 'int main()':
--- Comment #2 from bangerth at gmail dot com 2009-01-30 15:28 ---
Thinking some more about it, I believe that the code is actually valid.
icc accepts it, for comparison.
W.
--
bangerth at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #5 from bangerth at gmail dot com 2009-01-30 15:29 ---
I think Jason confirmed this already...
--
bangerth at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #10 from bangerth at gmail dot com 2009-01-30 15:37 ---
(In reply to comment #9)
> Following the twisted maze that is BOOST_CLASS_EXPORT() leads me to think that
> it is (very) roughly equivalent to this:
>
> void dummy(boost::archive::xml_iarchive & ar, A & a, B & b) {
>
--- Comment #3 from bangerth at gmail dot com 2009-01-30 15:45 ---
Confirmed. There is no need to convolve error messages like that.
W.
--
bangerth at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #16 from bangerth at gmail dot com 2009-01-30 15:49 ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> Excuse me, but I do not understand what makes this code invalid. Could anybody
> explain? If so, does this apply to all the test cases given (also for bugs
> that
> are marked as duplicates of
--- Comment #17 from bangerth at gmail dot com 2009-01-30 15:51 ---
*** Bug 38681 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
bangerth at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #7 from bangerth at gmail dot com 2009-01-30 15:51 ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> Did I understand this wrong ? Does the correct interpretation of the standard
> not allow for member-function-pointers as non-type arguments ?
It does, but it requires them to be in a constant-
--- Comment #2 from bangerth at gmail dot com 2009-01-30 15:58 ---
The standard details certain side effects of throwing exceptions such
as allocating and freeing memory as well as setting expressions that
std::uncaught_exception can evaluate. These side effects can not
always be omitted
--- Comment #2 from bangerth at gmail dot com 2009-01-30 16:02 ---
Confirmed. Gcc would have to keep track of the actual types of variables.
W.
--
bangerth at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #7 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-01-30 16:04 ---
I think it is caused by revision 118356:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2006-11/msg7.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39026
--- Comment #13 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-30 16:11 ---
(In reply to comment #12)
>
> For source codes [a-k]*, there where 906 occurrences of the "set but
> not used" warning from Intel C/C++.
>
@dcb
I think nobody is discussing that we would want such warning (in some
--- Comment #2 from esigra at gmail dot com 2009-01-30 16:12 ---
GCC already understands the semantics of strlen. If one of the operands to "<"
is a constant and the other is strlen, it is optimized (such as "strlen(str) >=
1). It just seems like the case with strlen on both sides is mis
--- Comment #1 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-30 16:17 ---
Subject: Bug 39028
Author: jakub
Date: Fri Jan 30 16:17:30 2009
New Revision: 143797
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=143797
Log:
PR c++/39028
* parser.c (cp_parser_already_scoped
--- Comment #2 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-30 16:18 ---
Fixed on the trunk so far.
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
S
--- Comment #6 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-30 16:35 ---
I think this may be due to the use of setjmp and
DEF_GCC_BUILTIN(BUILT_IN_SETJMP, "setjmp", BT_FN_INT_PTR, ATTR_NULL)
missing the fact that setjmp returns twice.
Note also the inconsistency in
if (is_gi
[...@gnu-6 gcc]$ cat /tmp/i.ii
inline void foo () {}
int
main ()
{
foo ();
return 0;
}
[...@gnu-6 gcc]$ ./xgcc -B./ -fpie /tmp/i.ii -S
[...@gnu-6 gcc]$ grep call i.s | grep foo
call_z3f...@plt
[...@gnu-6 gcc]$
Do we need @PLT for PIE?
--
Summary: C++ compiler doesn
GCC-4.3.3, all previous versions are unaffected.
This snippet:
8< --- 8<
#include
int main()
{
static const char *s = "hello world";
printf(s);
return 0;
}
- 8< -- 8< -
built with -Wformat throws this warning:
test-f.c: In function 'main':
test-f.c:5: w
--- Comment #8 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-01-30 16:44 ---
(In reply to comment #6)
>
> It would be a way more local change than changing what binds local
> (which also affects other languages).
My proposal patch will bind undefined functions global, instead of
local. It s
--- Comment #7 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-30 16:54 ---
ECF_RETURNS_TWICE is set by special_function_p, doesn't need anything special
in
builtins.def.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38977
--- Comment #3 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-01-30 16:57
---
In the meanwhile the patch for PR38503 has been installed and unfortunately I
have to report that this issue seems indeed different, eg, this testcase is
still not fixed on x86_64-linux:
#include
#include
c
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
Last re
--- Comment #17 from jdassen at debian dot org 2009-01-30 17:02 ---
Now fixed in libgsf upstream:
http://svn.gnome.org/viewvc/libgsf?view=revision&revision=1039
Thank you very much!
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39015
--- Comment #8 from matz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-30 17:12 ---
But special_function_p looks at the name of the function, which is
__builtin_setjmp in case the builtin is used explicitely:
% cat x.c
#include
jmp_buf env;
int f(void){ return __builtin_setjmp(env);}
% gdb --args cc
--- Comment #9 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-30 17:23 ---
Ah, I thought special_function_p would strip off __builtin_ prefix from tname,
but apparently it doesn't. I'd say it should, something like:
--- gcc/calls.c2009-01-28 12:57:50.0 +0100
+++ gcc/calls.c2009-01-3
--- Comment #1 from tydeman at tybor dot com 2009-01-30 17:31 ---
My analysis shows that
d10=0x2fe3=+3.e-15
So, d10 is not zero, while d2 is zero.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39034
--- Comment #16 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-30 17:31 ---
Patch to set DECL_EXTERNAL instead:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-01/msg01525.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39013
--- Comment #20 from hjl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-30 17:32 ---
Subject: Bug 38745
Author: hjl
Date: Fri Jan 30 17:31:24 2009
New Revision: 143798
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=143798
Log:
2009-01-30 H.J. Lu
2009-01-27 Richard Guenther
--- Comment #6 from hjl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-30 17:32 ---
Subject: Bug 38747
Author: hjl
Date: Fri Jan 30 17:31:24 2009
New Revision: 143798
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=143798
Log:
2009-01-30 H.J. Lu
2009-01-27 Richard Guenther
--- Comment #10 from hjl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-30 17:32 ---
Subject: Bug 38748
Author: hjl
Date: Fri Jan 30 17:31:24 2009
New Revision: 143798
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=143798
Log:
2009-01-30 H.J. Lu
2009-01-27 Richard Guenther
--- Comment #18 from hjl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-30 17:32 ---
Subject: Bug 38503
Author: hjl
Date: Fri Jan 30 17:31:24 2009
New Revision: 143798
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=143798
Log:
2009-01-30 H.J. Lu
2009-01-27 Richard Guenther
--- Comment #21 from hjl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-30 17:32 ---
Subject: Bug 38851
Author: hjl
Date: Fri Jan 30 17:31:24 2009
New Revision: 143798
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=143798
Log:
2009-01-30 H.J. Lu
2009-01-27 Richard Guenther
--- Comment #2 from tydeman at tybor dot com 2009-01-30 17:34 ---
This is NOT a dup of 39034. In this one, the value of the expression is zero.
In 39034, the value of d10 is not zero (but should be).
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39035
--
hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.4.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34955
--- Comment #12 from hjl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-30 17:47 ---
Subject: Bug 38789
Author: hjl
Date: Fri Jan 30 17:46:24 2009
New Revision: 143799
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=143799
Log:
2009-01-30 H.J. Lu
Backport from mainline:
2009-
--- Comment #7 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-01-30 18:30 ---
Fixed.
--
hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #1 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-30 18:30 ---
Is N1312 available online? I had not heard of any version later than N1290.
--
janis at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-01-30 18:41 ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> Is N1312 available online? I had not heard of any version later than N1290.
>
http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n1312.pdf
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?i
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org
--- Comment #3 from marc dot glisse at normalesup dot org 2009-01-30 20:38
---
Hello,
looking at the two last comments, I think we are speaking of slightly different
things, although they are related. I was asking for some const_cast of the
return value, in case the const version of wc
--- Comment #2 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-30 20:44 ---
Created an attachment (id=17214)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=17214&action=view)
expanded testcase
I expanded the testcase to test both constant folding and runtime calculations
for all three de
--
janis at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hjl dot tools at gmail dot
|
--
janis at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hjl dot tools at gmail dot
|
--- Comment #17 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-30 20:47 ---
Subject: Bug 39013
Author: jakub
Date: Fri Jan 30 20:46:32 2009
New Revision: 143803
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=143803
Log:
PR target/39013
* c-decl.c (pop_scope): Set DECL
--- Comment #3 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-30 20:48 ---
Created an attachment (id=17215)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=17215&action=view)
expanded testcase
I expanded the testcase to test both constant folding and runtime calculations
for all three de
--- Comment #18 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-30 20:50 ---
Fixed on the trunk so far.
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known
g++ allows to exist not inited reference in this case:
struct X
{
int &x;
};
int main()
{
X* p_x = new X; // now there is not inited reference (p_x->x)
// now we can try to use p_x->x
std::cout << p_x->x << std::endl; // segmentation fault
return 0;
}
There are no errors or wa
--
janis at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hjl dot tools at gmail dot
|
--- Comment #3 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-30 20:56 ---
Created an attachment (id=17216)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=17216&action=view)
remove visibility attribute with -D_GLIBCXX_VISIBILITY=0, run testuite with it
and -fvisibility-hidden
--
http
--- Comment #3 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-30 20:57 ---
Ryan, would you please provide information about the status of C library
decimal float support for powerpc*-linux and s390-linux?
HJ, would you please provide information about the status of C library decimal
float su
--- Comment #1 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-01-30 21:08 ---
A patch is posted at
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-01/msg01533.html
--
hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #2 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-01-30 21:22 ---
The updated patch is at
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-01/msg01534.html
--
hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-30 21:31 ---
The bug is a duplicate of 20785 because the pragma is not implemented.
>From the point of view of GCC it is invalid because and the functions
it declares are not provided by GCC, but by the C library.
--
http://
--- Comment #3 from hjl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-30 21:55 ---
Subject: Bug 39010
Author: hjl
Date: Fri Jan 30 21:55:30 2009
New Revision: 143806
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=143806
Log:
2009-01-30 H.J. Lu
PR lto/39010
* lto-function-ou
--- Comment #4 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-01-30 21:58 ---
Fixed.
--
hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRM
Version info:
$ powerpc-apple-darwin8.11.0-gcc-4.4.0 -v
Using built-in specs.
Target: powerpc-apple-darwin8.11.0
Configured with: ../gcc-4.4-20090116/configure --prefix=/opt/local
--enable-languages=c,c++,objc,obj-c++ --libdir=/opt/local/lib/gcc44
--includedir=/opt/local/include/gcc44 --infodir=/o
--
janis at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |janis at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org
g++ crashes with a segmentation fault trying to compile the attached program
--
Summary: Segmentation fault in g++
Product: gcc
Version: 4.3.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: major
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assigne
--- Comment #5 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-30 22:09 ---
Subject: Bug 39041
Author: rguenth
Date: Fri Jan 30 22:09:15 2009
New Revision: 143808
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=143808
Log:
2009-01-30 Richard Guenther
PR tree-optimization/
--- Comment #1 from dima at debian dot org 2009-01-30 22:10 ---
Created an attachment (id=17217)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=17217&action=view)
test case which triggers the core dump
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39047
--- Comment #2 from dima at debian dot org 2009-01-30 22:13 ---
$ g++ -v
Using built-in specs.
Target: i486-linux-gnu
Configured with: ../src/configure -v --with-pkgversion='Ubuntu 4.3.2-1ubuntu12'
--with-bugurl=file:///usr/share/doc/gcc-4.3/README.Bugs
--enable-languages=c,c++,fortran,o
--- Comment #6 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-30 22:14 ---
Subject: Bug 39041
Author: rguenth
Date: Fri Jan 30 22:14:39 2009
New Revision: 143809
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=143809
Log:
2009-01-30 Richard Guenther
PR tree-optimization/
1 - 100 of 119 matches
Mail list logo
