http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43814
Maxim Kuvyrkov changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45074
Steven Bosscher changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||steven at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45074
Steffen Schmidt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||
Severity|major
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46446
--- Comment #2 from Jan Hubicka 2010-11-12 04:49:49 UTC
---
> The above ones are just caused by including -flto -flto-partition=none in the
> torture flags now, not to mention they fail before with -flto :).
Yes, those are old failures, just with
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39415
James Dennett changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||james.dennett at gmail dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33989
--- Comment #15 from Scott Mansell 2010-11-12
04:04:25 UTC ---
Weirdly, it works fine with doubles.
Testcase:
union a
{
long int i;
double f;
};
void d(double *a, long int *b, double e)
{
union a c;
c.f = *a + e;
*b = c.i;
}
Results
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44782
Nathan Froyd changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44782
--- Comment #2 from Nathan Froyd 2010-11-12
03:38:19 UTC ---
Author: froydnj
Date: Fri Nov 12 03:38:15 2010
New Revision: 166644
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=166644
Log:
gcc/
PR c/44782
* common.opt (fmax-errors=
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33989
--- Comment #14 from Scott Mansell 2010-11-12
03:15:21 UTC ---
I downloaded and compiled the 2010-11-6 snapshot of gcc 4.6.
I'm still getting the extra load/store in ppc with -O3.
.L.f:
lfs 0,0(3)
fadds 0,1,0
stfs 0,-16(1)
lwz 0,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46447
Summary: std::atomic_flag slower than std::atomic_uchar
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
AssignedTo: unass
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46446
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski 2010-11-12
01:26:21 UTC ---
>FAIL: g++.dg/guality/redeclaration1.C -O2 -flto -flto-partition=none line 13
i == 42
> FAIL: g++.dg/torture/pr34850.C -O2 -flto -flto-partition=none (test for
excess errors)
> FAI
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46446
Summary: [4.6 regression] New test failures
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: middle-end
AssignedTo: unassig...
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46441
Zdenek Sojka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||abel at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1 fro
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46443
--- Comment #2 from Arthur Muller 2010-11-12 00:09:27
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> You are violating C/C++ aliasing rules; You are accessing a double as a long
> which causes undefined behavior. memcpy does not cause this violation since
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46445
--- Comment #2 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-11-12 00:07:59 UTC ---
This isn't a gfortran problem. You need to either install
an older version of gfortran that has libgfortran.so.1 or
rebuild your application with the version of gfortran that
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46445
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46445
Summary: libgfortran.so.3 _gfortran_copy_string
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libfortran
AssignedTo: unas
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46443
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21920
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||muller at vki dot com
--- Comment #153 fr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46088
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46347
--- Comment #2 from Paolo Carlini 2010-11-11
23:52:50 UTC ---
Very well, I may well be wrong, I admit to have filed this enhancement PR
basing only on some quite small tests + the definite impression that we have
functions inline in the profile-m
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46088
--- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek 2010-11-11
23:51:22 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Nov 11 23:51:18 2010
New Revision: 166635
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=166635
Log:
PR target/46088
* config/i386/i386.md (*ash
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46444
Summary: termination of preprocessing by cpp when no include
file is found
Product: gcc
Version: 4.4.5
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
C
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46443
Summary: -O2 flag generates incorrect code
Product: gcc
Version: 4.1.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
AssignedTo: unassig...@gcc.gnu.o
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46442
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46442
Summary: [4.6 Regression] Revision 166625 failed to bootstrap
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: bootstrap
Assig
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46347
--- Comment #1 from rus at google dot com 2010-11-11 23:14:45 UTC ---
The size difference of 100 KB on small tests is actually expected. The vector
instantiation will trigger instantiation of several profile analysis methods.
All these methods us
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46388
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46413
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46205
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46205
--- Comment #3 from Tobias Burnus 2010-11-11
23:07:28 UTC ---
Author: burnus
Date: Thu Nov 11 23:07:23 2010
New Revision: 166631
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=166631
Log:
2010-11-11 Tobias Burnus
PR fortran/46
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46413
--- Comment #2 from Tobias Burnus 2010-11-11
23:07:27 UTC ---
Author: burnus
Date: Thu Nov 11 23:07:23 2010
New Revision: 166631
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=166631
Log:
2010-11-11 Tobias Burnus
PR fortran/46
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46325
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46325
--- Comment #7 from Tobias Burnus 2010-11-11
23:02:10 UTC ---
Author: burnus
Date: Thu Nov 11 23:02:03 2010
New Revision: 166628
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=166628
Log:
2010-11-11 Jakub Jelinek
Tobias Burn
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46325
--- Comment #6 from Tobias Burnus 2010-11-11
22:32:26 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> Well, the actual argument associated with pfoo here is not x but
> (/"is Ja","ne Fo","nda "/)
Well, the effective argument nevertheless does not have the T
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46441
Summary: [4.5 Regression] ICE: RTL check: expected code 'reg',
have 'plus' in rhs_regno, at rtl.h:1053 with
-fsel-sched-pipelining -fselective-scheduling2
Product: gcc
Version
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46325
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek 2010-11-11
22:18:35 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> > y => pfoo ((/"is Ja","ne Fo","nda "/))
>
> However, as the actual argument associated with "pfoo" (namely "x") is
> not a target
Well, the actual argu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45894
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44772
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46160
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46099
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43690
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Known to work|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40436
--- Comment #38 from Jan Hubicka 2010-11-11
22:08:31 UTC ---
Author: hubicka
Date: Thu Nov 11 22:08:26 2010
New Revision: 166624
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=166624
Log:
PR tree-optimize/40436
* gcc.dg/tree-ssa/i
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46325
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45722
--- Comment #24 from Rainer Orth 2010-11-11 21:49:28
UTC ---
Created attachment 22377
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=22377
assembler output for 32-bit Solaris 10/SPARC, -Os
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45722
--- Comment #23 from Rainer Orth 2010-11-11 21:48:30
UTC ---
Created attachment 22376
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=22376
preprocessed input for 32-bit Solaris 10/SPARC, -Os
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45722
--- Comment #22 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE 2010-11-11 21:45:40 UTC ---
It dies with SIGBUS here:
Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
[Switching to Thread 1 (LWP 1)]
0x00012d24 in testE ()
at
/vol/gcc/src/hg/trunk
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46432
Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nickc at redhat dot com
--- Comm
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45894
--- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek 2010-11-11
20:41:36 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Nov 11 20:41:34 2010
New Revision: 166621
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=166621
Log:
Backport from mainline
2010-11-09 Jakub Je
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44772
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek 2010-11-11
20:40:36 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Nov 11 20:40:32 2010
New Revision: 166620
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=166620
Log:
Backport from mainline
2010-11-05 Jakub Je
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46160
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek 2010-11-11
20:39:33 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Nov 11 20:39:25 2010
New Revision: 166619
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=166619
Log:
2010-11-11 Jakub Jelinek
Backport from main
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46099
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek 2010-11-11
20:38:15 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Nov 11 20:38:12 2010
New Revision: 166618
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=166618
Log:
Backport from mainline
2010-11-05 Jakub Je
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43690
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek 2010-11-11
20:36:54 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Nov 11 20:36:49 2010
New Revision: 166617
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=166617
Log:
Backport from mainline
2010-11-05 Jakub Je
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46165
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek 2010-11-11
20:35:13 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Nov 11 20:35:10 2010
New Revision: 166616
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=166616
Log:
Backport from mainline
2010-11-03 Jakub Je
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46107
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek 2010-11-11
20:33:21 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Nov 11 20:33:18 2010
New Revision: 166615
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=166615
Log:
Backport from mainline
2010-11-03 Jakub Je
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46421
--- Comment #2 from Leo Izen 2010-11-11 20:11:35
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> Invalid, you need the mingw32 headers installed.
How do I get these?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46423
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #8 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44749
Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46440
Summary: [4.5/4.6 Regression] ICE: in rtl_verify_flow_info, at
cfgrtl.c:2165 with -fstack-protector-all
-fno-tree-dominator-opts -fno-tree-fre
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44749
--- Comment #5 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke
2010-11-11 19:11:51 UTC ---
Author: amylaar
Date: Thu Nov 11 19:11:44 2010
New Revision: 166614
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=166614
Log:
PR target/44749
* config
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46423
--- Comment #7 from rguenther at suse dot de
2010-11-11 18:43:39 UTC ---
On Thu, 11 Nov 2010, Richard Guenther wrote:
> On Thu, 11 Nov 2010, ubizjak at gmail dot com wrote:
>
> > http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46423
> >
> > --- Co
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46423
--- Comment #6 from rguenther at suse dot de
2010-11-11 18:42:53 UTC ---
On Thu, 11 Nov 2010, ubizjak at gmail dot com wrote:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46423
>
> --- Comment #5 from Uros Bizjak 2010-11-11
> 17:47:47 UTC --
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46242
--- Comment #3 from Martin Jambor 2010-11-11
18:23:52 UTC ---
Actually, my patch for PR 46053 and PR 46287 fixes also this one:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-11/msg01140.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46423
--- Comment #5 from Uros Bizjak 2010-11-11 17:47:47
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> Ok, the catch is that they seem to be target specific now. Is there way to
> say to ignore
> warning if it appears?
dg-prune-output perhaps?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46242
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|unassigned at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46302
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46388
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek 2010-11-11
17:14:47 UTC ---
Fixed.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46424
--- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely 2010-11-11
17:13:20 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #5)
>
> Maybe I'm misinterpreting the standard, but in 23.2.1, it states:
>
> "The insert members shall not affect the validity of iterators and references
> t
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41644
Peter Bergner changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bergner at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46375
--- Comment #5 from Eric Botcazou 2010-11-11
15:56:09 UTC ---
This patchlet is sufficient but I wonder how it will fare...
Index: emit-rtl.c
===
--- emit-rtl.c (revision 166490)
++
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46388
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek 2010-11-11
15:48:43 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Nov 11 15:48:39 2010
New Revision: 166603
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=166603
Log:
PR middle-end/46388
* expr.c (expand_assign
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46269
--- Comment #6 from Aldy Hernandez 2010-11-11
15:46:10 UTC ---
I have submitted a fix here:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-11/msg01078.html
I have also submitted a fix for the additional ICE mentioned in the testcase
("XXX Commenting th
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45088
--- Comment #6 from Dodji Seketeli 2010-11-11
15:43:17 UTC ---
I believe this is a smaller reproducer (the type of *a1 is not present
in debug info):
struct A
{
virtual ~A();
};
struct B : public A
{
virtual ~B(){}
};
struct C : public
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45088
Dodji Seketeli changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46439
Summary: Internal compiler error
Product: gcc
Version: 4.4.3
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
AssignedTo: unassig...@gcc.gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46423
--- Comment #4 from Jan Hubicka 2010-11-11 14:57:57 UTC
---
> --- Comment #3 from Richard Guenther 2010-11-11
> 14:22:23 UTC ---
> The testcase is supposed to not ICE or hang, the diagnostics indeed come
> and go, so it's fine to expect them ag
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33989
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||
--- Comment #13 from Richard Guenther
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33989
Scott Mansell changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||phiren at gmail dot com
--- Comment #12 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46423
--- Comment #3 from Richard Guenther 2010-11-11
14:22:23 UTC ---
The testcase is supposed to not ICE or hang, the diagnostics indeed come
and go, so it's fine to expect them again. See svn log which tells you
that martin removed them last time .
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45721
--- Comment #3 from Jan Hubicka 2010-11-11 14:16:07 UTC
---
Hi,
handling of weaks and weakrefs is indeed deeply broken with LTO. I plan to
look into it after pushing more of the stuff
I don't want to get into mainline too late in stage3. That is
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46423
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rguenther at suse dot de
--- Comment #2 fro
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44150
--- Comment #10 from Richard Guenther 2010-11-11
14:05:29 UTC ---
Ah, I think it has gone latent by disabling frame-pointer by default on
i?86-linux and enabling (async) unwind tables. No unwind tables was
exactly the problem, on i?86-linux at l
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46362
--- Comment #20 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE 2010-11-11 13:56:56 UTC ---
> --- Comment #19 from Dave Korn 2010-11-11 13:38:04
> UTC ---
> Hi Rainer, I'm closing this bug despite not having heard back from you about
> your latest boots
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46362
Dave Korn changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46397
Dave Korn changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46362
--- Comment #18 from Dave Korn 2010-11-11 13:34:04
UTC ---
Author: davek
Date: Thu Nov 11 13:33:59 2010
New Revision: 166601
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=166601
Log:
PR bootstrap/46397
PR bootstrap/46362
* co
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46397
--- Comment #17 from Dave Korn 2010-11-11 13:34:04
UTC ---
Author: davek
Date: Thu Nov 11 13:33:59 2010
New Revision: 166601
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=166601
Log:
PR bootstrap/46397
PR bootstrap/46362
* co
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46375
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46438
Summary: xtensa-elf --enable-werror-always build fails
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: build
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: targ
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46437
Summary: mcore-elf --enable-werror-always build fails
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: build
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: targe
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46375
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
AssignedTo|rguenth at gcc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46436
Summary: m68hc11-elf --enable-werror-always build fails
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: build
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tar
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46435
Summary: cris-elf --enable-werror-always build fails
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: build
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46434
Summary: crx-elf --enable-werror-always build fails
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: build
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46433
Summary: var-tracking.c doesn't include tm_p.h
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: build
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: rtl-optimiza
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46205
--- Comment #2 from Tobias Burnus 2010-11-11
13:07:03 UTC ---
Untested patch:
Index: resolve.c
===
--- resolve.c (Revision 166598)
+++ resolve.c (Arbeitskopie)
@@ -9098,8 +9098,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46397
Dave Korn changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
URL|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46362
Dave Korn changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
URL|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45721
--- Comment #2 from Richard Guenther 2010-11-11
12:28:42 UTC ---
More complete testcase:
--- file1.c
void baz(void) {}
void *y = (void *)baz;
int main () { return 0; }
--- file2.c
static void bar(void) __attribute__ ((weakref("baz")))
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46383
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|mjambor at su
1 - 100 of 141 matches
Mail list logo
