http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47891
--- Comment #6 from Dmitry Gorbachev d.g.gorbachev at gmail dot com
2011-03-15 06:18:47 UTC ---
Since gcc 4.6 branched, gcc trunk and 4.6 branch both have this issue now.
It is not a GCC bug, it's a Binutils bug. The patch
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48130
--- Comment #4 from Benjamin Kosnik bkoz at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-15
06:19:12 UTC ---
Author: bkoz
Date: Tue Mar 15 06:19:08 2011
New Revision: 170979
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=170979
Log:
2011-03-14 Benjamin Kosnik
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48127
--- Comment #1 from Dmitry Gorbachev d.g.gorbachev at gmail dot com
2011-03-15 06:22:13 UTC ---
Works when changing the number of elements in baz to 8.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47891
--- Comment #7 from Dongsheng Song dongsheng.song at gmail dot com 2011-03-15
08:01:34 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #6)
Since gcc 4.6 branched, gcc trunk and 4.6 branch both have this issue now.
It is not a GCC bug, it's a Binutils bug. The
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48132
Summary: Internal compiler error on array of std::complex with
-std=cxx0x
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48031
--- Comment #16 from Mikael Pettersson mikpe at it dot uu.se 2011-03-15
08:44:29 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #14)
Created attachment 23614 [details]
patch
testing appreciated
Applied to gcc 4.6/4.5/4.4 then bootstrapped and regression
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42954
Francois-Xavier Coudert fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48132
Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48129
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45844
Alan Modra amodra at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|powerpc-apple-darwin9
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48111
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ktietz at gcc dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48088
--- Comment #4 from Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-15
09:20:47 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #3)
(In reply to comment #2)
Yeah. Confirmed.
You need -Wframe-larger-than=500 -Werror=frame-larger-than which hopefully
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47883
Francois-Xavier Coudert fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47166
--- Comment #33 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-03-15 09:38:10 UTC ---
Author: rsandifo
Date: Tue Mar 15 09:38:07 2011
New Revision: 170982
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=170982
Log:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45844
Alan Modra amodra at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot |amodra at gmail dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48031
--- Comment #17 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-15
09:49:39 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Tue Mar 15 09:49:33 2011
New Revision: 170983
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=170983
Log:
2011-03-15 Richard
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48118
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.3.6
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48117
--- Comment #2 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-15
10:06:28 UTC ---
Oops - my bad ;)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47899
--- Comment #11 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-15
10:09:25 UTC ---
Confirmed, but can you track this in a new bug?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45088
Dodji Seketeli dodji at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48124
--- Comment #3 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-15
10:21:04 UTC ---
Hm, e has alignment of 8 bytes and f of 4 but the assembler doesn't pad
e's size to 8 byte multiples appearantly
.data
.align 8
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48127
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||matz at gcc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48128
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|i686-*-*|i686-*-*,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48130
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.7.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48132
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.6.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48133
Summary: [4.5/4.6/4.7 Regression] ICE: in get_loop_body, at
cfgloop.c:831 with -O -funroll-loops -fthread-jumps
-fno-tree-ch
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47899
--- Comment #12 from Zdenek Sojka zsojka at seznam dot cz 2011-03-15 10:50:35
UTC ---
Thank you for reply. I opened PR48133 for the testcase from comment #10.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48124
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-15
10:52:44 UTC ---
I think that is not the problem, it is fine if some variables are aligned more
than they need to be for performance reasons. TYPE_ALIGN is still 32 bits,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41490
--- Comment #3 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-15
11:09:14 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Tue Mar 15 11:09:09 2011
New Revision: 170984
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=170984
Log:
2011-03-15 Richard
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41490
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12395
--- Comment #17 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-15
11:24:13 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #16)
To optimize
void foo() {
extern int a;
if(++a) ++a;
}
we need to have partial dead store elimination,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48129
--- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-15
11:28:38 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Mar 15 11:28:35 2011
New Revision: 170985
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=170985
Log:
PR
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39753
Iain Sandoe iains at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mrs at gcc dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46763
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||matz at gcc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48133
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39753
--- Comment #8 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-15
11:49:12 UTC ---
The easiest way is to attach the may_alias attribute to all object types that
should not be subject to TBAA. Bonus point if you transition that attribute
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48132
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48037
--- Comment #7 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-15
12:22:18 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Tue Mar 15 12:22:12 2011
New Revision: 170986
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=170986
Log:
2011-03-15 Richard
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48037
--- Comment #8 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-15
12:41:57 UTC ---
The patch fixed the pass-by-value cases to no longer go through stack memory.
The useless reg-reg moves prevail:
_Z6vsqrt2U8__vectord:
.LFB520:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48124
--- Comment #5 from Aldy Hernandez aldyh at redhat dot com 2011-03-15
12:42:36 UTC ---
struct S
{
signed a : 26;
signed b : 16;
signed c : 10;
volatile signed d : 14;
int e;
} s;
I think you can't just modify s.e when
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48032
--- Comment #4 from Alan Modra amodra at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-15 12:57:42
UTC ---
Author: amodra
Date: Tue Mar 15 12:57:37 2011
New Revision: 170990
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=170990
Log:
PR target/48032
*
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48032
Alan Modra amodra at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45844
Alan Modra amodra at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48132
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-15
13:19:09 UTC ---
Regressed (expectedly) with
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=166167
The problem seems to be that the middle-end relies on indexes being filled in
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=13954
--- Comment #18 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-15
13:37:42 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Tue Mar 15 13:37:23 2011
New Revision: 170994
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=170994
Log:
2011-03-15 Richard
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48134
Summary: [4.6/4.7 Regression] ICE: in refs_may_alias_p_1, at
tree-ssa-alias.c:1085 with custom flags
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47650
--- Comment #14 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-15
13:39:50 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Tue Mar 15 13:39:28 2011
New Revision: 170995
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=170995
Log:
2011-03-15 Richard
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47650
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=13954
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48134
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48134
--- Comment #2 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-15
13:59:05 UTC ---
That's the COMPONENT_REF case which runs into get_inner_reference which
doesn't deal with invalid MEM_REFs either. It returns t.s as base.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48133
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48134
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-15
14:36:39 UTC ---
Created attachment 23664
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=23664
gcc46-pr48134.patch
This fixes it, though perhaps as discussed earlier we
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48135
Summary: build fails on Solaris2.8 due to Glob.pm not found
within /usr/perl5
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48135
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48136
Summary: verify_gimple failed at -O0
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
AssignedTo: unassig...@gcc.gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48135
--- Comment #2 from Denis Excoffier Denis.Excoffier at airbus dot com
2011-03-15 15:09:37 UTC ---
Oh, thank you for pointing, but i should not be concerned since i
didn't modify the sources (i simply include gmp/mpfr/mpc within
the source
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48112
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48136
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48135
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-15
15:19:34 UTC ---
But are you using Sun ld, building libstdc++, and not using --disable-symvers?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47552
--- Comment #7 from Janne Blomqvist jb at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-15 15:26:05
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #3)
(In reply to comment #2)
If not before, perhaps something to fix when/if we change to use size_t for
string lengths, see
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48136
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47552
--- Comment #8 from Francois-Xavier Coudert fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-03-15 15:36:16 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #7)
- Yes, Fortran itself does not have unsigned integers, but the string length
type is invisible to Fortran programs.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47650
--- Comment #16 from joe at mcknight dot de 2011-03-15 15:52:01 UTC ---
Created attachment 23665
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=23665
dump_function_declaration with debug
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47650
--- Comment #17 from joe at mcknight dot de 2011-03-15 15:53:23 UTC ---
Created attachment 23666
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=23666
debug output from a run of the modified function
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47650
--- Comment #18 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-15
15:56:04 UTC ---
comment #13 would happen if the list of argument types is not terminated by
the shared tree node void_list_node but by a clone. We expect the
shared
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47650
--- Comment #19 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-15
15:59:44 UTC ---
All looks good to me with your C testcase:
gcc gdb --args ./cc1 -quiet t.i
(gdb) b gimplify_function_tree
Breakpoint 5 at 0x855ac4: file
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47650
--- Comment #20 from joe at mcknight dot de 2011-03-15 16:03:23 UTC ---
Unfortunately I cannot confirm that this bug is fixed, so I need to reopen it.
For one thing this bug is not only about variadic functions, but
dump_function_declaration()
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47688
--- Comment #2 from Ramana Radhakrishnan ramana at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-15
16:14:29 UTC ---
Author: ramana
Date: Tue Mar 15 16:14:21 2011
New Revision: 171000
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=171000
Log:
Fix PR 47688
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47668
--- Comment #8 from Ramana Radhakrishnan ramana at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-15
16:14:29 UTC ---
Author: ramana
Date: Tue Mar 15 16:14:21 2011
New Revision: 171000
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=171000
Log:
Fix PR 47688
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47650
--- Comment #21 from joe at mcknight dot de 2011-03-15 16:18:37 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #19)
All looks good to me with your C testcase:
(gdb) call debug_generic_expr (fndecl-common.type)
int T357 (struct
{
double dvar;
int ivar;
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48137
Summary: [4.6/4.7 Regression] sorry, unimplemented: inlining
failed in call to 'cb' with -fnon-call-exceptions
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47571
--- Comment #37 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ro at CeBiTec dot
Uni-Bielefeld.DE 2011-03-15 16:24:01 UTC ---
I'd really like to see this fixed before 4.6.0: it is a regression from
4.5 and makes fortran completely unusable on Tru64
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47510
--- Comment #5 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-15
16:24:27 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #4)
This is because G++ generates struct Fint::C. The instantiated
Fint::C a typedef. No anonymous struct is generated inside
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48137
--- Comment #1 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-15
16:29:33 UTC ---
indirect calls can't be always-inline, the testcase is invalid.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48137
--- Comment #2 from Zdenek Sojka zsojka at seznam dot cz 2011-03-15 16:32:37
UTC ---
Oh, sorry. It was reduced from gcc.c-torture/compile/pr44043.c:
...
static inline __attribute__((always_inline)) int dst_output(struct sk_buff
*skb) {
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47650
--- Comment #22 from rguenther at suse dot de rguenther at suse dot de
2011-03-15 16:33:09 UTC ---
On Tue, 15 Mar 2011, joe at mcknight dot de wrote:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47650
--- Comment #21 from joe at mcknight dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48137
--- Comment #3 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-15
16:36:34 UTC ---
Yes, well ... if it works you are lucky. Works in this case can even
mean we simply don't turn the indirect call into a direct one (in which
case we'll
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48135
Denis Excoffier Denis.Excoffier at airbus dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48136
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-15
16:46:02 UTC ---
Created attachment 23668
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=23668
gcc47-pr48136.patch
Patch I'm going to bootstrap/regtest.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48137
Zdenek Sojka zsojka at seznam dot cz changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47571
Janne Blomqvist jb at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #23648|0 |1
is
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47650
--- Comment #23 from joe at mcknight dot de 2011-03-15 17:05:24 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #22)
Compare it to:
typedef int mytype;
int myfunc2(mytype var) {
return 1;
};
which outputs
static int myfunc2 (mytype);
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46788
--- Comment #5 from Ramana Radhakrishnan ramana at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-15
17:05:56 UTC ---
Author: ramana
Date: Tue Mar 15 17:05:51 2011
New Revision: 171002
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=171002
Log:
Fixup last commit.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47688
--- Comment #3 from Ramana Radhakrishnan ramana at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-15
17:05:56 UTC ---
Author: ramana
Date: Tue Mar 15 17:05:51 2011
New Revision: 171002
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=171002
Log:
Fixup last commit.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48135
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-15
17:07:04 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #4)
Sun ld yes, libstdc++ i suppose (although i was caught in libgomp) and
--disable-symvers is the next thing i'm going to try.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46788
--- Comment #6 from Ramana Radhakrishnan ramana at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-15
17:07:56 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #5)
Author: ramana
Date: Tue Mar 15 17:05:51 2011
New Revision: 171002
URL:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47571
--- Comment #39 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-15
17:08:03 UTC ---
Looks fine to me.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46788
--- Comment #7 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com 2011-03-15
17:16:11 UTC ---
AFAICS, however, pr47688.c is still there.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47571
--- Comment #40 from Janne Blomqvist jb at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-15
17:19:43 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #37)
I'd really like to see this fixed before 4.6.0: it is a regression from
4.5 and makes fortran completely unusable on Tru64 UNIX
Hi Eric, Hi Richard,
A customer has reported the following bug with the MIPS target. Since
it is for a GNU extension to the C language (zero-length arrays) that
is being used in a non-intended fashion (the zero-length array is in a
structure with no other fields) I doubt if you will want
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48127
--- Comment #3 from Dmitry Gorbachev d.g.gorbachev at gmail dot com
2011-03-15 18:00:23 UTC ---
I do not agree that the testcase is invalid. As the standart says:
Common extensions
Multiple external definitions
There may be more than
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48138
Summary: __attribute__((aligned)) should give an error when
applied to a typedef or template parameter, at least
in C++0x mode.
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47557
Jeffrey Yasskin jyasskin at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jyasskin at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34758
--- Comment #10 from Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-15
18:27:15 UTC ---
Author: jason
Date: Tue Mar 15 18:27:09 2011
New Revision: 171009
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=171009
Log:
PR c++/34758
*
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39753
m...@gcc.gnu.org mrs at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|alias, wrong-code |
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46922
--- Comment #5 from Benjamin Kosnik bkoz at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-15
18:43:21 UTC ---
Hey P, why was bad_function_call added in CXXABI instead of GLIBCXX? That
doesn't make sense to me.
-benjamin
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47309
Eric Le Lay elelay at macports dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||elelay at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48130
--- Comment #5 from Benjamin Kosnik bkoz at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-15
19:01:57 UTC ---
HP if you can confirm this is now working, can you close this? thanks.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46922
--- Comment #6 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com 2011-03-15
19:03:01 UTC ---
Uhhhm, you are right, doesn't make much sense, I don't know what i was
thinking. Luckily we are still in time to move those lines in gnu.ver. Let me
1 - 100 of 130 matches
Mail list logo
