http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47182
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47182
--- Comment #3 from Tobias Burnus 2011-01-14
07:18:58 UTC ---
Author: burnus
Date: Fri Jan 14 07:18:54 2011
New Revision: 168776
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=168776
Log:
2011-01-14 Tobias Burnus
PR fortran/47
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47285
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47287
Summary: FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/builtins/20010124-1.c
execution with -flto
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47285
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46894
Jack Howarth changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||howarth at nitro dot
|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44341
--- Comment #10 from Kazumoto Kojima 2011-01-14
00:11:39 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #9)
> Another approach to fix the problem
It looks that the patch fixes the issue, though I've got
...
../LOCAL/trunk/configure: line 5232: ${with_target_mpc_
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47260
--- Comment #12 from Craig Powers 2011-01-14
00:10:29 UTC ---
Rather more tricky to get gcc built in mingw than I would have liked, but...
it's all fixed. I can export with DLLEXPORT or with a .def file.
Thanks for the quick fix!
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46710
Matthias Klose changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||doko at ubuntu dot com
--- Comment #4 fr
AssignedTo: unassig...@gcc.gnu.org
ReportedBy: an...@samba.org
Target: powerpc64-unknown-linux-gnu
A gcc build from yesterday (4.6.0 20110113) fails when building a ppc64 Linux
kernel. A cut down testcase:
struct thread_info {
int preempt_count;
};
static inline struct
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47285
Summary: G format outputs wrong number of characters when
decimal supplied in literal
Product: gcc
Version: 4.4.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47284
Summary: G format outputs wrong number of asterixes
Product: gcc
Version: 4.4.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libfortran
AssignedTo: un
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46170
--- Comment #24 from David Fang 2011-01-13
23:23:49 UTC ---
Apologies, my typo:
known-to-fail: 4.4.4 4.5.2
known-to-work: 4.4.2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47283
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47283
--- Comment #1 from Matthias Klose 2011-01-13 22:11:25
UTC ---
Created attachment 22962
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=22962
preprocessed source
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47283
Summary: [4.6 regression] ICE in refs_may_alias_p_1, at
tree-ssa-alias.c
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47282
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46170
--- Comment #23 from David Fang 2011-01-13
22:07:10 UTC ---
Hi again, any chance Dodji's patches could be pushed to the 4.5 and/or 4.4
branches, before it gets too close to release time again? Thanks.
also if we're keeping fields accurate,
keyw
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=323
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ichudov at algebra dot com
--- Comment #179
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47268
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47282
--- Comment #3 from Igor Chudov 2011-01-13
22:01:12 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> (In reply to comment #1)
> > What target are you doing your tests on?
>
> This is a 32 bit Ubuntu machine, so target -s -m32.
>
> Thanks!
>
> Igor
It is a
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47268
--- Comment #1 from Tobias Burnus 2011-01-13
22:00:53 UTC ---
Author: burnus
Date: Thu Jan 13 22:00:50 2011
New Revision: 168766
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=168766
Log:
2011-01-13 Tobias Burnus
PR fortran/47
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47282
--- Comment #2 from Igor Chudov 2011-01-13
22:00:31 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> What target are you doing your tests on?
This is a 32 bit Ubuntu machine, so target -s -m32.
Thanks!
Igor
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47282
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski 2011-01-13
21:55:05 UTC ---
What target are you doing your tests on?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47282
Summary: GCC 4.2 gives different result for the same
computation with -O3, depending on irrelevant code
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39107
Kai Tietz changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ktietz at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #11 fro
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15774
Kai Tietz changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ktietz at gcc dot gnu.org
AssignedTo|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47213
Kai Tietz changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47213
--- Comment #1 from Kai Tietz 2011-01-13 20:02:01
UTC ---
Author: ktietz
Date: Thu Jan 13 20:01:57 2011
New Revision: 168763
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=168763
Log:
2011-01-13 Kai Tietz
PR c++/47213
* g++.dg
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47260
--- Comment #11 from Craig Powers 2011-01-13
19:56:11 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #10)
>
> Please confirm that it works. (I know that it unfortunately might take a few
> days until a newer MinGW build becomes available, unless you build GCC
> y
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38536
--- Comment #18 from Thomas Koenig 2011-01-13
19:52:31 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> An other failure:
>
> use iso_c_binding
> type t1
> integer :: i(5)
> end type t1
> type t2
> type(t1) :: t(5)
> end type t2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47267
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot |jvdelisle at gcc dot
|g
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47280
--- Comment #4 from H.J. Lu 2011-01-13 19:10:47
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> It is very likely caused by revision 163190:
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2010-08/msg00401.html
It is caused by revision 163190:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47275
--- Comment #7 from Paolo Carlini 2011-01-13
19:06:16 UTC ---
In general, it's just luck, in the sense that compile options affecting things
like char signedness or, as another example, the size of wchar_t, change the
ABI and nothing can be said,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47275
--- Comment #6 from ceckak at frontier dot com 2011-01-13 18:58:15 UTC ---
Fair enough. Presumably it's just luck that this works on some toolchains
then? Off to slog through a legacy codebase and sprinkle "signed char"
throughout...
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47275
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47240
--- Comment #14 from Dominique d'Humieres
2011-01-13 18:43:27 UTC ---
> I have never said that it was valid (it is not mine and you have probably
> recognized the style!-). Nevertheless there was no ICE at revision 168625 (I
> saw it at revision
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47280
--- Comment #3 from H.J. Lu 2011-01-13 18:42:34
UTC ---
It is very likely caused by revision 163190:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2010-08/msg00401.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47281
Summary: [4.6 Regression] error: non-trivial conversion at
assignment
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compon
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47280
--- Comment #2 from H.J. Lu 2011-01-13 18:38:46
UTC ---
This is introduced between revision 163188 and 163192.
Revision 163192 may not be the caused.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47280
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47260
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|WAITING
--- Comment #10 from Tobias Burnu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47260
--- Comment #9 from Tobias Burnus 2011-01-13
18:04:11 UTC ---
Author: burnus
Date: Thu Jan 13 18:04:03 2011
New Revision: 168757
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=168757
Log:
2011-01-13 Kai Tietz
Tobias Burnus
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47276
--- Comment #4 from Jan Hubicka 2011-01-13
17:16:00 UTC ---
I am testing the following patch. We are overactive on checking aliases of
aliases
Index: ipa.c
===
--- ipa.c (revi
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47260
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47260
--- Comment #7 from Craig Powers 2011-01-13
16:59:18 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> I also was unable to get the procedure into a DLL with omission of DLLEXPORT,
> instead attempting to get it in using a .DEF file and either gfortran or
> dll
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47275
--- Comment #4 from Andreas Schwab 2011-01-13 16:56:55
UTC ---
By changing the signedness of char you change the ABI and everything must use
the same ABI.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47274
Andreas Schwab changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
--- Comment #2 from Andreas Schwab
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46823
--- Comment #21 from Jan Hubicka 2011-01-13 16:49:42
UTC ---
> Err - I'm not sure what this
>
> /* Turn forward declarations into real ones. */
> fn = cgraph_node (fn)->decl;
>
> is about at all. At least the comment doesn't make any sens
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42505
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||4.6.0
Target Milestone|4.4.6
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47280
Summary: ICE: verify_stmts failed: statement marked for throw,
but doesn't with -fnon-call-exceptions -ftrapv
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: norma
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47204
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45848
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47204
--- Comment #5 from Tobias Burnus 2011-01-13
16:32:43 UTC ---
Author: burnus
Date: Thu Jan 13 16:32:33 2011
New Revision: 168753
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=168753
Log:
2011-01-13 Tobias Burnus
Mikael Mor
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45848
--- Comment #3 from Tobias Burnus 2011-01-13
16:32:43 UTC ---
Author: burnus
Date: Thu Jan 13 16:32:33 2011
New Revision: 168753
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=168753
Log:
2011-01-13 Tobias Burnus
Mikael Mor
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46894
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
URL||http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-p
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47258
--- Comment #5 from Bingfeng Mei 2011-01-13 15:49:23
UTC ---
It works. But I have no idea about the debug info issue in your other comment.
> (In reply to comment #2)
> > After tried patches one-by-one, I believe the misoptimization is down to
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42505
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45586
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org |unassigned at gcc dot
|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39838
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at redhat dot com
AssignedTo
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46973
Dodji Seketeli changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47279
Summary: Bootstrap fails in stage1 with GCC 4.6
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: bootstrap
AssignedTo: unassig
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39077
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39077
--- Comment #21 from Jeffrey A. Law 2011-01-13
13:41:09 UTC ---
Author: law
Date: Thu Jan 13 13:41:03 2011
New Revision: 168747
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=168747
Log:
* PR rtl-optimization/39077
* doc/invoke.te
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47278
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47278
--- Comment #1 from Richard Guenther 2011-01-13
13:37:55 UTC ---
Created attachment 22959
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=22959
patch for the 4.3 branch
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47147
--- Comment #11 from js-gcc at webkeks dot org
2011-01-13 13:28:27 UTC ---
Sorry for the late reply.
Your patch worked fine.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47276
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47278
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||4.1.2, 4.6.0
Target Milestone|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47278
Summary: [4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression] hidden weak function not
handled properly
Product: gcc
Version: 4.5.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: wrong-code
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47276
--- Comment #3 from Pawel Sikora 2011-01-13 12:49:29
UTC ---
git bisect identified this commit.
[87ac7f211c08dba84adbd23b1013ef20aa3627f0] PR tree-optmization/46469
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47275
--- Comment #3 from Mikael Pettersson 2011-01-13
12:28:35 UTC ---
I can't reproduce this failure on powerpc64-linux either with -m32 and current
4.4/4.5/4.6.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47276
--- Comment #2 from Pawel Sikora 2011-01-13 11:44:10
UTC ---
Created attachment 22958
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=22958
testcase.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46823
--- Comment #20 from Martin Jambor 2011-01-13
11:00:52 UTC ---
Based on Honza's comment #17 I proposed a different patch, making sure
we update the statement as expected, like I described in comment #18
and I have already posted it to the mailing
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47273
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47274
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47275
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47276
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43494
--- Comment #29 from rguenther at suse dot de
2011-01-13 10:55:01 UTC ---
On Thu, 13 Jan 2011, aoliva at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43494
>
> --- Comment #28 from Alexandre Oliva 2011-01-13
> 10:31:21
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47270
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.4.6
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46823
--- Comment #19 from Richard Guenther 2011-01-13
10:35:33 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #16)
> The problem seems to be a different one. During IPA decision making
> we decide to clone a function and the call graph node of the original
> one is th
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43494
--- Comment #28 from Alexandre Oliva 2011-01-13
10:31:21 UTC ---
Created attachment 22957
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=22957
Updated patch, still awaiting review
The patch to fix this bug, posted on Sept 21, is still await
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45472
--- Comment #14 from Andrey Belevantsev 2011-01-13
10:04:18 UTC ---
Do we want at least the patch properly merging the volatile bits in the
scheduler for 4.6? Or is this better be s plain ICE instead of a silent
miscompile?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47277
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-invalid-code
Status|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46642
Andrey Belevantsev changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46522
Andrey Belevantsev changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46521
Andrey Belevantsev changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45352
Andrey Belevantsev changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45352
--- Comment #27 from Andrey Belevantsev 2011-01-13
09:29:13 UTC ---
Author: abel
Date: Thu Jan 13 09:29:09 2011
New Revision: 168742
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=168742
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/45352
* se
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47275
Mikael Pettersson changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mikpe at it dot uu.se
--- Comment #2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44341
--- Comment #9 from Alexandre Oliva 2011-01-13
09:07:09 UTC ---
Created attachment 22956
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=22956
Another approach to fix the problem
Here's another approach that IMHO is more consistent: instead
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47277
Summary: pseudo destructor code that cause an internal compiler
error with std=gnu++0x
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47276
Summary: ICE in function_and_variable_visibility, at ipa.c:857
during compiling glibc.
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P
93 matches
Mail list logo
