http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48765
Ira Rosen changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48787
Thomas Henlich changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #24120|0 |1
is obsolete|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48815
Summary: configure: error: Link tests are not allowed after
GCC_NO_EXECUTABLES.
Product: gcc
Version: 4.5.3
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48815
--- Comment #1 from henry0312 at gmail dot com 2011-04-29 08:19:46 UTC ---
Created attachment 24139
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24139
libiberty's config log
libiberty's config log
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48815
--- Comment #2 from henry0312 at gmail dot com 2011-04-29 08:20:28 UTC ---
Created attachment 24140
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24140
libssp's config log
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47230
--- Comment #5 from Uros Bizjak 2011-04-29 08:35:29
UTC ---
Unfortunately, the bootstrap on alphaev6-linux again fails with this message.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48786
--- Comment #3 from Tobias Burnus 2011-04-29
09:24:30 UTC ---
Created attachment 24141
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24141
Example 2, cf. comment 3, third item
(In reply to comment #2)
> See http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/20
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48816
Summary: possible pointless code in file cxx-pretty-print.c,
line 2136
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: trivial
Priority: P3
Comp
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48817
Summary: [avr] gcc does not build (error: format not a string
literal and no format arguments)
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pri
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47230
Mikael Pettersson changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mikpe at it dot uu.se
--- Comment #6
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48812
--- Comment #1 from Richard Guenther 2011-04-29
09:43:16 UTC ---
We do not exploit the fact that shifts bigger than the width of the type
are undefined (in fact we even try to preserve the fact that some CPUs
truncate the shift count when constan
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48818
Summary: Wrong copy constructor used when using std::pair in
.so and app.
Product: gcc
Version: 4.5.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Co
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48813
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||x86_64-*-*
Status|UNCONFIR
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48814
--- Comment #1 from Richard Guenther 2011-04-29
09:56:08 UTC ---
6.5.16/4
"The order of evaluation of the operands is unspecified."
The gimplifier is responsible for this semantic detail of GENERIC (that
matches C for its sequence point rules)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48815
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48816
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48819
Summary: [4.7 regression] 350 execution failures in 64-bit
libjava testsuite on SPARC
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48819
--- Comment #1 from Rainer Orth 2011-04-29 10:17:20 UTC
---
Created attachment 24143
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24143
assembler output before patch
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48819
--- Comment #2 from Rainer Orth 2011-04-29 10:18:29 UTC
---
Created attachment 24144
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24144
assembler output after patch
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48818
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48819
--- Comment #3 from Richard Guenther 2011-04-29
10:30:33 UTC ---
Can you check if
Index: tree.c
===
--- tree.c (revision 173151)
+++ tree.c (working copy)
@@ -1019,7 +1019
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48819
--- Comment #4 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE 2011-04-29 10:40:14 UTC ---
> --- Comment #3 from Richard Guenther 2011-04-29
> 10:30:33 UTC ---
> Can you check if
>
> Index: tree.c
> ==
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48498
--- Comment #8 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE 2011-04-29 10:42:00 UTC ---
> --- Comment #7 from Ira Rosen 2011-04-28 07:42:31
> UTC ---
> I submitted a patch (http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-04/msg01627.html)
> some time ago, but
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48819
--- Comment #5 from Richard Guenther 2011-04-29
10:44:54 UTC ---
Issues may arise if build_int_cst is called with NULL_TREE and the value
is using all HOST_WIDE_INT bits (I suppose 64 on sparc-sun-solaris2?) but
integer_type_node has less precisi
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48814
--- Comment #2 from Johannes Schaub
2011-04-29 10:42:12 UTC ---
Since the order of evaluation is undefined it may evaluate "count++" and
"incr()" in any order, as it pleases.
Since there is a sequence point before entering a function, and befor
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48815
henry0312 at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED
Resolutio
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48814
--- Comment #3 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2011-04-29 12:03:14 UTC ---
This may well be a bug, but it's the sort of case where you want an
analysis not in terms of sequence points but in terms of the more
precisely defined sequencing mod
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48816
--- Comment #2 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2011-04-29 12:08:57 UTC ---
On Fri, 29 Apr 2011, rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> It is "used" in i += 3. I suppose we should ignore value-updates in
> use analysis.
See PR 44677.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48814
--- Comment #4 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2011-04-29 12:13:46 UTC ---
I think the relevant wording in the C1X DIS is "With respect to an
indeterminately-sequenced function call, the operation of postfix ++ is a
single evaluation."; C++
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48819
--- Comment #6 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE 2011-04-29 12:32:34 UTC ---
> --- Comment #5 from Richard Guenther 2011-04-29
> 10:44:54 UTC ---
> Issues may arise if build_int_cst is called with NULL_TREE and the value
> is using all HOS
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48819
--- Comment #7 from rguenther at suse dot de
2011-04-29 12:40:19 UTC ---
On Fri, 29 Apr 2011, ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE wrote:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48819
>
> --- Comment #6 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48820
Summary: TR 29113: Implement parts needed for MPI 3
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
AssignedTo:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48819
--- Comment #8 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE 2011-04-29 12:50:00 UTC ---
> ick. So, I suppose
>
> CONSTRUCTOR_PREPEND_VALUE (d, build_int_cst (ptr_type_node,
> temp));
>
> would fix it as well. Patch is obvious if it works fo
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48821
Summary: IMPORT :: dummy_arg is rejected, while "IMPORT"
imports it
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: rejects-valid
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48093
--- Comment #3 from H.J. Lu 2011-04-29 13:29:48
UTC ---
There are no -mtls-dialect=gnu2 runtime testcases anywhere either.
We have no idea if it works at all.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48809
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|unassigned at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48822
Summary: G++ gets stucks and never finishes compilation when
enabling -O2/3 optimization options.
Product: gcc
Version: 4.5.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: major
P
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48822
--- Comment #1 from qball at sarine dot nl 2011-04-29 13:44:26 UTC ---
Created attachment 24146
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24146
Test case triggering the bug.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48810
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48822
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48786
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47230
--- Comment #7 from Uros Bizjak 2011-04-29 14:01:55
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> FWIW, I've never gotten that linkage failure on my alphaev6-linux machine, and
> last week's snapshots (4.7-20110423, 4.6-20110422, and 4.5-20110421) all
> boo
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48822
--- Comment #3 from qball at sarine dot nl 2011-04-29 14:04:48 UTC ---
Doing -O1 -finline-small-functions breaks it aswell.
Indeed adding -fno-tree-fre fixes compilation.
Thanks.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48822
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Component|c++
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48823
Summary: gcc-4.6.0 floating-point optimization regression on
ia64-Linux
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Comp
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48769
--- Comment #1 from Dominique d'Humieres 2011-04-29
14:15:53 UTC ---
PR48819 looks like a duplicate of this pr.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48819
--- Comment #9 from Dominique d'Humieres 2011-04-29
14:17:30 UTC ---
PR48769 looks like a duplicate of this PR. As I said in this pr I am traveling
and have limited testing capabilities.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48813
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-04-29
14:18:10 UTC ---
Started with http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=139234
so might very well be latent before that.
Slightly cleaned up testcase:
/* PR rtl-optimization/48813 */
/* { dg-d
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48824
Summary: Wrong link to fixed bug-list on release notes
Product: gcc
Version: 4.5.3
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: web
AssignedTo: unassi
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48824
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48684
--- Comment #7 from Jerry DeLisle 2011-04-29
14:56:08 UTC ---
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Fri Apr 29 14:56:02 2011
New Revision: 173166
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=173166
Log:
2011-04-29 Jerry DeLisle
Janne Blomq
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48488
--- Comment #4 from Jerry DeLisle 2011-04-29
14:56:06 UTC ---
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Fri Apr 29 14:56:02 2011
New Revision: 173166
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=173166
Log:
2011-04-29 Jerry DeLisle
Janne Blomq
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48787
--- Comment #5 from Jerry DeLisle 2011-04-29
14:56:08 UTC ---
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Fri Apr 29 14:56:02 2011
New Revision: 173166
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=173166
Log:
2011-04-29 Jerry DeLisle
Janne Blomq
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48602
--- Comment #44 from Jerry DeLisle 2011-04-29
14:56:07 UTC ---
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Fri Apr 29 14:56:02 2011
New Revision: 173166
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=173166
Log:
2011-04-29 Jerry DeLisle
Janne Blom
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48615
--- Comment #13 from Jerry DeLisle 2011-04-29
14:56:08 UTC ---
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Fri Apr 29 14:56:02 2011
New Revision: 173166
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=173166
Log:
2011-04-29 Jerry DeLisle
Janne Blom
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48815
--- Comment #5 from henry0312 at gmail dot com 2011-04-29 15:03:23 UTC ---
I'm sorry.
This error, 'configure: error: Link tests are not allowed after
GCC_NO_EXECUTABLES. ', occurs when 'make -j4'.
I tried 'make', then
configure: error: in
`/Use
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48815
--- Comment #6 from henry0312 at gmail dot com 2011-04-29 15:04:56 UTC ---
Created attachment 24147
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24147
libgomp's config log
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48815
--- Comment #7 from henry0312 at gmail dot com 2011-04-29 15:07:36 UTC ---
> However, When I tried without '--disable-debug' and '--enable-static",
> compiled
> successfully.
I made typo :(
Correctly, without '--disable-shared' and '--enable-sta
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48615
--- Comment #14 from Jerry DeLisle 2011-04-29
15:09:03 UTC ---
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Fri Apr 29 15:08:57 2011
New Revision: 173168
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=173168
Log:
2011-04-29 Jerry DeLisle
PR libgfortra
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48684
--- Comment #8 from Jerry DeLisle 2011-04-29
15:09:03 UTC ---
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Fri Apr 29 15:08:57 2011
New Revision: 173168
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=173168
Log:
2011-04-29 Jerry DeLisle
PR libgfortran
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48787
--- Comment #6 from Jerry DeLisle 2011-04-29
15:09:03 UTC ---
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Fri Apr 29 15:08:57 2011
New Revision: 173168
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=173168
Log:
2011-04-29 Jerry DeLisle
PR libgfortran
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48602
--- Comment #45 from Jerry DeLisle 2011-04-29
15:09:02 UTC ---
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Fri Apr 29 15:08:57 2011
New Revision: 173168
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=173168
Log:
2011-04-29 Jerry DeLisle
PR libgfortra
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48488
--- Comment #5 from Jerry DeLisle 2011-04-29
15:09:02 UTC ---
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Fri Apr 29 15:08:57 2011
New Revision: 173168
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=173168
Log:
2011-04-29 Jerry DeLisle
PR libgfortran
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48821
--- Comment #1 from Tobias Burnus 2011-04-29
15:44:32 UTC ---
The following in decl.c's gfc_match_import looks wrong:
if (gfc_current_ns->parent != NULL
&& gfc_find_symbol (name, gfc_current_ns->parent, 1, &sym))
{
On 04/29/2011 12:14 AM, thenlich at users dot sourceforge.net wrote:
---snip---
The suggested patch fails on examples in this test where d>0.
I think for rounding up we need to test if ALL the cut off digits are zeros.
I have committed the whole ball of wax. I really needed to do this becau
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48787
--- Comment #7 from jvdelisle at frontier dot com 2011-04-29 15:55:14 UTC ---
On 04/29/2011 12:14 AM, thenlich at users dot sourceforge.net wrote:
---snip---
>
> The suggested patch fails on examples in this test where d>0.
>
> I think for rounding
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48488
--- Comment #6 from Janne Blomqvist 2011-04-29 15:58:23
UTC ---
Author: jb
Date: Fri Apr 29 15:58:20 2011
New Revision: 173169
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=173169
Log:
PR 48488 Fix comments
Modified:
trunk/libgfortr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48488
--- Comment #8 from Janne Blomqvist 2011-04-29 16:06:55
UTC ---
Author: jb
Date: Fri Apr 29 16:06:48 2011
New Revision: 173171
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=173171
Log:
PR 48488 Typo
Modified:
trunk/libgfortran/io/wr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48488
--- Comment #7 from Janne Blomqvist 2011-04-29 16:03:57
UTC ---
Author: jb
Date: Fri Apr 29 16:03:54 2011
New Revision: 173170
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=173170
Log:
PR 48488 Fix comments
Modified:
trunk/libgfortr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48786
--- Comment #4 from Tobias Burnus 2011-04-29
16:04:45 UTC ---
Mini analysis:
(In reply to comment #3)
> ==30150== Invalid read of size 8
> ==30150==at 0x4CB104: gfc_compare_derived_types (interface.c:409)
The problem is that the second argu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48814
--- Comment #5 from Johannes Schaub
2011-04-29 16:20:44 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> I think the relevant wording in the C1X DIS is "With respect to an
> indeterminately-sequenced function call, the operation of postfix ++ is a
> single e
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48825
Summary: libiberty "psignal" lacks const modifier, failing to
compile when HAVE_PSIGNAL is undefined
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
-__cxa_atexit
--with-local-prefix=/home/ryan/x-tools/mips-unknown-linux-uclibc/mips-unknown-linux-uclibc/sys-root
--disable-nls --enable-threads=posix --enable-symvers=gnu --enable-c99
--enable-long-long --enable-target-optspace
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.7.0 20110429 (experimental) [trunk revision
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48825
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48810
--- Comment #3 from Tobias Burnus 2011-04-29
16:49:59 UTC ---
Author: burnus
Date: Fri Apr 29 16:49:53 2011
New Revision: 173175
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=173175
Log:
2011-04-29 Tobias Burnus
PR fortran/48
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48825
--- Comment #2 from Josef Mutzenbacher
2011-04-29 16:51:06 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> HAVE_PSIGNAL is supposed to be defined if the header file has psignal. Why
> does that not happen? Look at config.log.
i was building with musl libc,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48800
--- Comment #3 from Tobias Burnus 2011-04-29
16:50:00 UTC ---
Author: burnus
Date: Fri Apr 29 16:49:53 2011
New Revision: 173175
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=173175
Log:
2011-04-29 Tobias Burnus
PR fortran/48
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48825
--- Comment #3 from froydnj at codesourcery dot com 2011-04-29 17:02:42 UTC ---
On Fri, Apr 29, 2011 at 04:54:34PM +, wkor97gy0eef1fr at i dot
mintemail.com wrote:
> i was using --disable-bootstrap to disable bootstrapping, but make still
> in
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47230
--- Comment #8 from Mikael Pettersson 2011-04-29
17:17:48 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #7)
> (In reply to comment #6)
> > FWIW, I've never gotten that linkage failure on my alphaev6-linux machine,
> > and
> > last week's snapshots (4.7-20110423,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47230
--- Comment #9 from Uros Bizjak 2011-04-29 17:52:24
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #8)
> > > I do have quite an old binutils (2.18.50.0.9-8.fc10 20080822). I tried
> > > binutils-2.21 once, but it regressed some gcc tls test so I ditched it.
> >
...@gcc.gnu.org
ReportedBy: jan.kratoch...@redhat.com
CC: do...@gcc.gnu.org
Target: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
reposted from GDB BZ: http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12644
FAIL: gcc (GCC) 4.7.0 20110429 (experimental)
FAIL: gcc (GCC) 4.6.1 20110429 (prerelease
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47596
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48774
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #5 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48817
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39219
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48815
--- Comment #8 from henry0312 at gmail dot com 2011-04-29 19:06:04 UTC ---
Now I know the problem.
in config log,
ld: library not found for -lgcc_ext.10.5
I put libgcc_ext.10.5.dylib that is made with shared build to build_dir/gcc,
and compiled ag
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48815
--- Comment #9 from Andrew Pinski 2011-04-29
19:08:11 UTC ---
--disable-shared cannot be used for darwin.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48812
--- Comment #2 from Matthieu CASTET 2011-04-29
19:18:43 UTC ---
> We also have to make sure the shift count does not get negative, which
we can't in this case. Thus (1U<<(b-2)) is not equivalent to
(1U<> (b-2))
But I agree it is not trivial opt
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48828
Summary: freebsd gcc 4.7 update
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: major
Priority: P3
Component: other
AssignedTo: unassig...@gcc.gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48828
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski 2011-04-29
19:36:48 UTC ---
What does the output of "cc -v" give? It is the original cc which is giving an
internal compile error.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48819
--- Comment #10 from Rainer Orth 2011-04-29 19:36:15
UTC ---
Author: ro
Date: Fri Apr 29 19:36:12 2011
New Revision: 173183
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=173183
Log:
2011-04-29 Richard Guenther
PR middle-end/48819
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48819
--- Comment #11 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE 2011-04-29 19:42:13 UTC ---
> --- Comment #9 from Dominique d'Humieres
> 2011-04-29 14:17:30 UTC ---
> PR48769 looks like a duplicate of this PR. As I said in this pr I am traveling
> and h
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48828
--- Comment #2 from robbtek 2011-04-29 19:43:44
UTC ---
freebsd# cc -v
Using built-in specs.
Target: i386-undermydesk-freebsd
Configured with: FreeBSD/i386 system compiler
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.2.1 20070719 [FreeBSD]
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48819
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
URL|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48462
--- Comment #11 from Paul Thomas 2011-04-29 20:26:59
UTC ---
Author: pault
Date: Fri Apr 29 20:26:56 2011
New Revision: 173185
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=173185
Log:
2011-04-29 Paul Thomas
PR fortran/48462
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48746
--- Comment #6 from Paul Thomas 2011-04-29 20:26:59
UTC ---
Author: pault
Date: Fri Apr 29 20:26:56 2011
New Revision: 173185
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=173185
Log:
2011-04-29 Paul Thomas
PR fortran/48462
*
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48815
--- Comment #10 from henry0312 at gmail dot com 2011-04-29 21:13:27 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #9)
> --disable-shared cannot be used for darwin.
I see.
Thank you, Andrew Pinski.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48810
--- Comment #4 from Tobias Burnus 2011-04-29
21:26:10 UTC ---
Author: burnus
Date: Fri Apr 29 21:26:07 2011
New Revision: 173191
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=173191
Log:
2011-04-29 Tobias Burnus
PR fortran/48
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48810
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48800
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
1 - 100 of 115 matches
Mail list logo
