--- Comment #2 from gcczilla1 at achurch dot org 2009-10-22 06:57 ---
Sorry! Not sure how I missed that one in my search.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41789
--- Comment #9 from singler at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-22 06:57 ---
I can reproduce the bug on my machine (2 Quadcore Nehalems, 48GB RAM)
4 x 10^9 ints: 65 seconds used in sort
5 x 10^9 ints: 193 seconds used in sort
--
singler at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What
Simple program:
#include
int
main(int,
char **)
{
std::string i;
i = "abc";
}
Compiled as:
/usr/local/bin/g++ -O3 -Winline -flto -Werror \
-o z.exe z.cc -lintl
Gives:
In file included from
/usr/local/lib/gcc/alphaev56-unknown-linux-gnu/4.5.0/../../../../include/c++/4.
With revision 153024 this test passed.
>From revision 153037 and on, this test has failed as follows:
Running /tmp/hpautotest-gcc1/gcc/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/torture/dg-torture.exp
...
...
FAIL: g++.dg/torture/pr38811.C -O3 -g (internal compiler error)
FAIL: g++.dg/torture/pr38811.C -O3 -g (test
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-22 04:11 ---
Yes I agree we should not warn but bug 19635 was about the workaround which is
why I commented that way. Anyways this is a dup of bug 36774 (a still opened
bug).
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 36774
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-22 04:11 ---
*** Bug 41789 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
Currently, if one compiles with -Wmissing-prototypes, GCC will complain about a
nested function defined with no preceding prototype declaration, for example:
int foo(int a) {
auto int bar(int b) { return b; }
return bar(a);
}
According to bug 19635 comment #1, the "proper" way to do this
--- Comment #2 from hubicka at ucw dot cz 2009-10-22 00:29 ---
Subject: Re: New: ICE with -flto -fwhole-program
The problem here is that ipa-pure-const skips analysis of overwrittable
nodes. But with LTO and whole program the nodes might look
overwrittable at compile time, but at lin
When a packed non-POD struct is included in another packed struct,
the outer struct layout changes depending on whether -Wpacked is used or not.
It seems wrong that a warning option affects data layout and code generation.
The same behavior is observed with 4.4.2, 4.3.4, 4.2.1, 4.1.2.
It could be
--- Comment #3 from hubicka at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-21 23:58 ---
Actually it catch quite interesting thinko in early inliner. We cut iterations
of early inliner after fixed point of iterations but because of way the exit
condition is written we end up not applying the inline plan
The power7 code that was added in July, violates the powerpc ABI in two ways
due to the floating point registers overlap with the VSX registers.
1) HARD_REGNO_CALL_PART_CLOBBERED was not adjusted to disallow VSX registers
0..31 which overlap with the floating point registers to be live across
func
--- Comment #13 from spop at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-21 23:10 ---
Fixed.
This bug is potentially latent in older branches.
Should I test it in the 4.4 branch as well?
--
spop at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #12 from spop at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-21 23:05 ---
Subject: Bug 41497
Author: spop
Date: Wed Oct 21 23:05:39 2009
New Revision: 153441
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=153441
Log:
PR tree-optimization/41497
* tree-scalar-evolution
--- Comment #10 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-21 20:14
---
Created an attachment (id=18861)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18861&action=view)
1st part of a patch
Like this. We should never produce new non-constant value-numbers during
phi-translation
--- Comment #5 from ghazi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-21 19:51 ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> > (Also, you don't mention what version of gmp you were using.)
> Right, sorry: I've tried this with the latest version, gmp 4.3.1.
Okay I checked gmp source tarballs, and it looks like the
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-21 19:49 ---
I don't think this is misparsing this at all. This is one place in the C++
standard that says it should be parsed as a function declaration rather than a
variable declaration to resolve an ambiguous between those tw
--- Comment #10 from mikpe at it dot uu dot se 2009-10-21 19:47 ---
(In reply to comment #9)
> My version is:
> [r...@ build]# ccmips -V
> ccmips: `-V' option must have argument
> [r...@pace build]# ccmips --version
> ccmips (GCC) 3.3.2 20030904 (Wind River vxworks61) (built 20050516
The declaration
form proj (space(V[i]), V_new_i, "mass");
of an object 'proj' of class 'form' is not recognized,
see below
#include
using std::vector;
#include
struct space_component;
struct const_space_component;
template
class smart_pointer {
public:
// allocators:
smart_pointer
Source code below makes an ICE:
g++-mp-4.5 -std=c++0x bug.cc
bug.cc: In instantiation of 'derived':
bug.cc:20:16: instantiated from here
bug.cc:9:1: internal compiler error: canonical types differ for identical types
derived and derived
Source:
struct a {};
template < typename T, typename EN
--- Comment #9 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-21 18:08 ---
Ok, I'm pretty much sure what happens and what is wrong. I'll fix what is
wrong
and we'll need that phi-translation fix to fixup the regressions that'll cause.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=417
--- Comment #8 from hjl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-21 16:05 ---
Subject: Bug 41728
Author: hjl
Date: Wed Oct 21 16:05:31 2009
New Revision: 153063
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=153063
Log:
2009-10-21 H.J. Lu
2009-10-16 Richard Guenther
--- Comment #12 from hjl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-21 16:05 ---
Subject: Bug 41717
Author: hjl
Date: Wed Oct 21 16:05:31 2009
New Revision: 153063
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=153063
Log:
2009-10-21 H.J. Lu
2009-10-16 Richard Guenther
--- Comment #3 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-21 16:04 ---
Fixed.
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
--- Comment #3 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-21 16:02 ---
Here is a further reduced test case:
module A_mod
type :: A
end type
end module
module B_mod
use A_mod
type, extends(A) :: B
end type
end module
module C_mod
use B_mod
type :: C
end type C
end modu
--- Comment #1 from espindola at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-21 15:51
---
The produced symbol table is incorrect:
~/binutils/inst/bin/nm test.o
t MAIN__
U _gfortran_set_args
U _gfortran_set_options
0001 C gnu_lto_v1
000
--- Comment #2 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-21 15:41 ---
The ICE also happens with a clean trunk.
Here is the backtrace:
#0 0x7fcacadb56a0 in strcmp () from /lib/libc.so.6
#1 0x005419c6 in gfc_find_symtree (st=0x2bcdf30, name=0x0) at
/home/jweil/gcc45/trunk/g
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |pault at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org
--- Comment #8 from matz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-21 15:35 ---
But the important one (for zeusmp) is the first loop. That isn't vectorized
anymore (but was in r151560, i.e. there it vectorized two loops).
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41783
--- Comment #7 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-21 15:32 ---
Created an attachment (id=18860)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18860&action=view)
patch v2
With this updated patch the example in comment #4 is rejected with the correct
error message.
--
jan
--- Comment #7 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-21 15:26 ---
LIM cleans up the 2nd insertion for me and moves the load next to the first
insertion. What remains is the full redundancy and elimination of all the
PHIs, so yes, your PRE patch would solve this. And yes, it is on
--- Comment #1 from sfilippone at uniroma2 dot it 2009-10-21 15:24 ---
Created an attachment (id=18859)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18859&action=view)
test case
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41784
/local/gnu45
--enable-languages=c,c++,fortran : (reconfigured) ../gcc/configure
--prefix=/usr/local/gnu45 --enable-languages=c,c++,fortran
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.5.0 20091021 (experimental) (GCC)
[sfili...@donald bug9]$ gfortran -c linmap_type_mod.f90
linmap_type_mod.f90:105:0: internal
--- Comment #6 from matz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-21 15:22 ---
Hmm, at least I don't remember any patch dealing with phi translation right
now.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41783
--- Comment #5 from matz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-21 15:20 ---
Yes, I mean the second insertion. The phi node generated for that one (in the
first j-loop) prevents vectorization in r151561 (I haven't really tested
newer revs that r151590). Maybe some other stuff in later revs cle
--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-21 15:16 ---
Which all is likely due to the fact that PHI translation does not properly
value-number translated loads and thus we create extra full redundancies
sometimes (usually resulting in extra PHI nodes, but here extra load
--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-21 15:14 ---
C testcase showing the likely underlying issue:
int db[100];
int dt, fact;
int main()
{
int i;
do
{
for (i=0; i<100; ++i)
db[i] = i;
fact = dt * i;
}
while (1);
}
where we not only
--- Comment #2 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-21 15:13 ---
Subject: Bug 25507
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Oct 21 15:13:21 2009
New Revision: 153058
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=153058
Log:
PR other/25507
* doc/invoke.texi: Document -print
--- Comment #44 from pogma at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-21 15:08 ---
Subject: Bug 41313
Author: pogma
Date: Wed Oct 21 15:07:59 2009
New Revision: 153057
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=153057
Log:
2009-10-21 Jack Howarth
PR c++/41313
* gcc/c
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-21 15:07 ---
Btw, the 2nd insertion is really weird (the first one in bb9 is just loop
invariant motion).
:
pretmp.7_45 = rootr.dt;
goto ;
:
:
# prephitmp.8_48 = PHI
D.1375_18 = (real(kind=8)) i_3;
D.1376_19 = prep
--
jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot
|dot org
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-21 14:53 ---
Confirmed. Btw the loop is still vectorized for me.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #9 from maurice35 dot david at laposte dot net 2009-10-21
14:46 ---
My version is:
[r...@ build]# ccmips -V
ccmips: `-V' option must have argument
[r...@pace build]# ccmips --version
ccmips (GCC) 3.3.2 20030904 (Wind River vxworks61) (built 20050516)
Copyright (C) 2003 F
zeusmp regressed by about 5% again with the PRE fix for PR41101, which is
r151561. The problem is that PRE now finds a partial redundancy (where in
reality there isn't any) and the PHI node to compensate for this prevents
vectorization of a loop due to its value used outside that loop. Testcase
e
--- Comment #6 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-21 14:25 ---
Found it:
"8.1.2.1 Control
flow in blocks
Transfer of control to the interior of a block from outside the block is
prohibited, except for the return from a procedure invoked within the block.
Transfers within a b
--- Comment #5 from sfilippone at uniroma2 dot it 2009-10-21 14:23 ---
>
> I believe jumping *into* a (DO/IF/SELECT (TYPE/CASE)/BLOCK/ ...) block is
> invalid, but they are all in the same scoping unit. However, I failed to find
> this restriction.
>
That is what is spelled out clearl
--- Comment #4 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-21 14:07 ---
While for
goto 99
if(.true.) then
99 continue
end if
end
one gets (for if, do, select case) the nice warning (!) message:
Warning: Label at (1) is not in the same block as the GOTO statement at (2)
One ge
--- Comment #4 from ro at techfak dot uni-bielefeld dot de 2009-10-21
13:37 ---
Subject: Re: Bootstrap with Sun Studio 12.1 fails
Just for reference: here's the corresponding pkgsrc problem report by my
colleague:
http://www.netbsd.org/cgi-bin/query-pr-single.pl?number=42109
--- Comment #3 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-21 13:17 ---
Created an attachment (id=18858)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18858&action=view)
patch
Mine. Preliminary patch attached.
--
janus at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #2 from dodji at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-21 13:10 ---
Created an attachment (id=18857)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18857&action=view)
Enhanced patch
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41736
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-21 12:31 ---
Confirmed.
Looks like invalid tree-sharing. On
(gdb) call debug_gimple_stmt (stmt)
# .MEM = VDEF <.MEM>
llvm::LiveInterval::removeRange (PI_10, D.2378_13->start, D.2378_13->end, 1);
we have replaced the first use
--- Comment #8 from mikpe at it dot uu dot se 2009-10-21 12:19 ---
I can reproduce the misalignment exceptions on armv5tel-linux-gnueabi with
gcc-4.3.4 at -O0 but not with gcc-4.4.2. The loop in main() which iterates
over the packed array creates a misaligned pointer from which it perfo
--- Comment #5 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-21 12:18 ---
Confirmed. But the reduced testcase has
typedef struct VEC_constructor_elt_gc {
VEC_constructor_elt_base base;
} VEC_constructor_elt_gc;
vs.
typedef struct VEC_constructor_elt_gc {
} VEC_constructor_elt_gc;
--- Comment #4 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-21 12:08 ---
Reduced test case. The problem is the GENERIC INTERFACE. For some reason, the
result attribute is not properly propagated. This leads to the bogus error:
print *, associated(a,f(a)) ! Valid, but error
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-21 11:30 ---
PRE should be turned into FRE at -Os. I have a patch for that somewhere, let
me re-surrect it.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--
doko at ubuntu dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41491
--- Comment #8 from doko at ubuntu dot com 2009-10-21 11:23 ---
Created an attachment (id=18856)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18856&action=view)
preprocessed source
attached the preprocessed source (from an 20091018 build). the compiler used to
build is a native c
--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-21 11:22 ---
gjar is broken.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 39177 ***
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #1 from edwintorok at gmail dot com 2009-10-21 11:22 ---
Created an attachment (id=18855)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18855&action=view)
testcase (reduced not.i)
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41782
When trying to compile and link the attached not.i with lto the linker dies
with this error:
/usr/bin/ld: internal error in set_linkonce_size, at ../../gold/layout.h:250
This only occurs if I use -use-linker-plugin, so I think this may be a bug in
gcc's gold plugin, so I'm filing this as a gcc bu
--- Comment #3 from ro at techfak dot uni-bielefeld dot de 2009-10-21
10:54 ---
Subject: Re: Bootstrap with Sun Studio 12.1 fails
> --- Comment #2 from ghazi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-21 01:48 ---
> I would prefer a solution that does not involve linking xgcc and cpp wit
--- Comment #11 from mikpe at it dot uu dot se 2009-10-21 10:51 ---
*** Bug 40547 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
mikpe at it dot uu dot se changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from mikpe at it dot uu dot se 2009-10-21 10:51 ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 40747 ***
--
mikpe at it dot uu dot se changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #23 from mikpe at it dot uu dot se 2009-10-21 10:48 ---
(In reply to comment #8)
> (In reply to comment #7)
> > With binutils from the 2.20 branch, and gcc from the 4.4 branch, including
> > Jakub's patch, and excluding the current workaround from Ramana, I get:
> >
>
> IIU
--- Comment #2 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-21 09:38 ---
Similar / same problem:
block
goto 99
end block
99 continue
end
--
burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #7 from maurice35 dot david at laposte dot net 2009-10-21
09:37 ---
It seems that I have a similar issue with ccmips compilator :
typedef struct
{
char A;
char B;
char C;
/*char padding;*/
} tStructABC;
typedef struct
{
tStructABC ABC1;
tStructABC ABC2;
} tStruct2ABC;
--- Comment #6 from maurice35 dot david at laposte dot net 2009-10-21
09:36 ---
Created an attachment (id=18854)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18854&action=view)
Screen shoot form lauterbach
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37954
--- Comment #1 from sfilippone at uniroma2 dot it 2009-10-21 09:34 ---
Created an attachment (id=18853)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18853&action=view)
test case
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41781
=c,c++,fortran : (reconfigured) ../gcc/configure
--prefix=/usr/local/gnu45 --enable-languages=c,c++,fortran
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.5.0 20091021 (experimental) (GCC)
COLLECT_GCC_OPTIONS='-v' '-c' '-mtune=generic'
/usr/local/gnu45/libexec/gcc/x86_64-unknown-li
--- Comment #1 from sebastian dot huber at embedded-brains dot de
2009-10-21 09:30 ---
Created an attachment (id=18852)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18852&action=view)
Fix proposal
This works at least for me.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41
I suppose the file "gcc/config/arm/lib1funcs.asm" does not work when compiled
for THUMB version 1 with an architecture other than __ARM_ARCH_6M__ since
r150545. I got a link error:
/opt/rtems-4.10-gcc/bin/../lib/gcc/arm-rtems4.10/4.5.0/../../../../arm-rtems4.10/bin/ld:
/opt/rtems-4.10-gcc/bin/../
--- Comment #3 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-21 09:22 ---
No regression, segfaults immediately with 4.2; shows the same behaviour for
4.3, 4.4 and 4.5.
--
burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
The following code produces a warning about precision loss in an int-to-float
conversion:
$cat warn.cpp
float f(float x, unsigned short y)
{
return x * y;
}
$g++ -Wconversion -c -o warn.o warn.cpp
warn.cpp: In function float f(float, short unsigned int):
warn.
--- Comment #2 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-21 09:12 ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> wget http://www.uszla.me.uk/FoX/source/FoX-4.0.4.tar.gz
> cd FoX-4.0.4 && ./configure FC=gfortran && make -j4
I forgot to re-mention that one needs to patch fsys/fox_m_fsys_array_str.F90's
--- Comment #1 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-21 09:10 ---
Created an attachment (id=18851)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18851&action=view)
Slightly reduced test case - needs now only FoX
Reduced test case -- still pretty large, but now only depends on
--- Comment #3 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-21 09:02 ---
Fixed with r153049. Closing.
--
janus at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #7 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-21 09:01 ---
Fixed with r153049. Closing.
--
janus at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-21 08:57 ---
Subject: Bug 41766
Author: janus
Date: Wed Oct 21 08:56:56 2009
New Revision: 153049
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=153049
Log:
2009-10-21 Janus Weil
PR fortran/41706
PR for
--- Comment #6 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-21 08:57 ---
Subject: Bug 41706
Author: janus
Date: Wed Oct 21 08:56:56 2009
New Revision: 153049
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=153049
Log:
2009-10-21 Janus Weil
PR fortran/41706
PR for
--- Comment #1 from carrot at google dot com 2009-10-21 08:50 ---
Created an attachment (id=18850)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18850&action=view)
test case
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41778
Compile the attached source code with options -Os -march=armv5te -mthumb, gcc
generates:
push{lr}
ldr r3, [r1, #4] // redundant
ldrbr3, [r3] // redundant
@ sp needed for prologue
pop {pc}
There are two redundant instructions.
C
Non-reduced test case.
This is with http://static.exciting-code.org/exciting.hydrogen.9.10.tar.gz
Untar, cp build/platform/make.inc.g95 build/platform/make.inc.gfortran and
adapt that file; run 'make'.
Note: Due to PR 41772, one needs to use the PGI loop in
src/FoX/fsys/fox_m_fsys_array_str.F90's
--- Comment #1 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-21 08:01 ---
Created an attachment (id=18849)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18849&action=view)
gcc45-pr41775.patch
Fix I'm going to bootstrap/regtest.
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
--- Comment #1 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-21 07:12 ---
The testcase is invalid, you can't pass NULL to %s. The fact that glibc printf
doesn't crash on it is just an extension. In your case gcc optimizes the
printf into puts and that one crashes even with glibc.
--
ja
83 matches
Mail list logo
