http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49202
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=49670
--- Comment #3 from Uros Bizjak ubizjak at gmail dot com 2011-07-08 07:54:33
UTC ---
Please add all information and especially preprocessed source, as explained in
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs/#detailed
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49673
Summary: [C++0x] const variables initialised with constexpr
constructor placed in .data not .rodata
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=4131
Thiago Macieira thiago at kde dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||thiago at kde dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49670
--- Comment #4 from Jeffrey Walton noloader at gmail dot com 2011-07-08
08:07:43 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #0)
Sorry if this was previously reported. Searching returned an error stating I
used an invalid file extension.
I was attempting
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49670
--- Comment #5 from Jeffrey Walton noloader at gmail dot com 2011-07-08
08:35:11 UTC ---
Created attachment 24710
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24710
File asn.s from class file causing internal compiler error
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49670
--- Comment #6 from Jeffrey Walton noloader at gmail dot com 2011-07-08
08:35:55 UTC ---
Created attachment 24711
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24711
File asn.ii from class causing internal compiler error
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49670
--- Comment #7 from Jeffrey Walton noloader at gmail dot com 2011-07-08
08:36:08 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #3)
Please add all information and especially preprocessed source, as explained in
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs/#detailed
Crypto++
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49662
--- Comment #3 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-07-08
08:42:36 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Fri Jul 8 08:42:31 2011
New Revision: 176031
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=176031
Log:
2011-07-08 Richard
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49662
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40528
--- Comment #16 from Agner Fog agner at agner dot org 2011-07-08 08:52:32 UTC
---
(In reply to comment #15)
(In reply to comment #14)
(In reply to comment #13)
What is the status of this issue?
It is implemented on ifunc branch.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49674
Summary: Improve documentation for __attribute__ __section__
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
AssignedTo:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49670
--- Comment #8 from Uros Bizjak ubizjak at gmail dot com 2011-07-08 09:42:59
UTC ---
The included source compiles OK for me with:
~/gcc-build/gcc/cc1plus -quiet -O2 -m32 -g -fstack-protector -march=prescott
-mtune=prescott --param
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47918
--- Comment #6 from Mikael Pettersson mikpe at it dot uu.se 2011-07-08
09:42:26 UTC ---
I can trigger the bug on i386 too, if I tweak the i386 backend to push function
parameters rather than moving them to pre-allocated stack space, and to
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49670
--- Comment #9 from Jeffrey Walton noloader at gmail dot com 2011-07-08
09:51:21 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #8)
The included source compiles OK for me with:
~/gcc-build/gcc/cc1plus -quiet -O2 -m32 -g -fstack-protector -march=prescott
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48727
--- Comment #7 from Rainer Orth ro at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-07-08 10:20:39 UTC
---
Author: ro
Date: Fri Jul 8 10:20:36 2011
New Revision: 176034
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=176034
Log:
PR testsuite/48727
*
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49674
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49671
--- Comment #4 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-07-08
10:30:32 UTC ---
Doesn't the outermost component also need TREE_THIS_VOLATILE? So I suppose
sink the
TREE_THIS_VOLATILE (*tp) = TREE_THIS_VOLATILE (old);
from the
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48108
Iain Sandoe iains at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #24705|0 |1
is
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47918
Mikael Pettersson mikpe at it dot uu.se changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|m68k-linux |m68k-linux,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49559
--- Comment #16 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com 2011-07-08
11:01:06 UTC ---
I believe I'm making good progress in analyzing, thus fixing, the issue with
inplace_merge: what I see clearly now is that - as noticed in Comment 9
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49398
Ramana Radhakrishnan ramana at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48108
--- Comment #15 from Jack Howarth howarth at nitro dot med.uc.edu 2011-07-08
11:18:25 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #14)
Created attachment 24712 [details]
updated work in progress
there were a couple of hunks in the previous from another LTO
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47918
Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49559
--- Comment #17 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com 2011-07-08
11:46:10 UTC ---
The *_backward case seems rather straightforward, with the roles of the
__first1, __last1 and __first2, __last2 ranges swapped.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49675
Summary: jacobi.F90:90:0: internal compiler error: Segmentation
fault
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
, noclone))
self (int i)
{
if (i == 200)
self (i + 1);
else
d (i + 2);
}
-g -O2
gcc (GCC) 4.7.0 20110708 (experimental)
DW_AT_GNU_call_site_value: 26 byte block: f3 1 55 23 2 8 cb f3 1 55 8 20 24 10
80 80 80 80 80 19 2e 28 1 0 16 13(DW_OP_GNU_entry_value: (DW_OP_reg5
(rdi
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43118
Ramana Radhakrishnan ramana at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ramana at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49675
Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus at gcc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49673
Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49130
--- Comment #11 from Jan Kratochvil jan.kratochvil at redhat dot com
2011-07-08 12:33:19 UTC ---
I do not see any functionality problem from it, neither now and neither in the
future.
(In reply to comment #7)
But DW_AT_name really represents
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49519
--- Comment #24 from hjl at gcc dot gnu.org hjl at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-07-08
13:12:05 UTC ---
Author: hjl
Date: Fri Jul 8 13:12:03 2011
New Revision: 176042
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=176042
Log:
Fix PR
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49676
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=49673
--- Comment #1 from Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-07-08
14:24:17 UTC ---
Author: jason
Date: Fri Jul 8 14:24:14 2011
New Revision: 176045
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=176045
Log:
PR c++/49673
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49673
Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49676
Jan Kratochvil jan.kratochvil at redhat dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48454
Ramana Radhakrishnan ramana at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45697
Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |SUSPENDED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49677
Summary: GCC 4.6.0 LTO files not compatible with GCC 4.6.1
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: lto
AssignedTo:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45697
--- Comment #3 from Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-07-08
14:57:52 UTC ---
Created attachment 24715
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24715
patch
But here's a patch against pre-4.7 to do what you want.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49169
Ramana Radhakrishnan ramana at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42894
Ramana Radhakrishnan ramana at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ramana at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49676
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-07-08
15:31:38 UTC ---
Created attachment 24716
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24716
gcc47-pr49676.patch
Attached patch saves those 2 bytes.
To answer the
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42894
--- Comment #26 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-07-08
15:35:01 UTC ---
It could, but I don't have time to do it myself. So, if somebody goes ahead
and tests the backport, fine.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49559
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #24613|0 |1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43460
Ramana Radhakrishnan ramana at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44071
Ramana Radhakrishnan ramana at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49678
Summary: scan for mov fails in gcc.target/arm/pr42575.c
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
AssignedTo:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20020
--- Comment #9 from Gary Funck gary at intrepid dot com 2011-07-08 16:20:50
UTC ---
This note is both a ping for this rather old bug report, as well as a follow up
with some additional information.
For the ping side of things, we have been
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49559
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #24717|0 |1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49678
Richard Earnshaw rearnsha at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||arm
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20020
--- Comment #10 from Gary Funck gary at intrepid dot com 2011-07-08 16:58:55
UTC ---
Note: I don't know how this fix fits in with the x86_64 ABI, and obviously once
this fix is in place, the binary call interface will change for 128 bit
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20020
--- Comment #11 from Gary Funck gary at intrepid dot com 2011-07-08 17:20:32
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #10)
Note: I don't know how this fix fits in with the x86_64 ABI, and obviously
once
this fix is in place, the binary call interface
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45603
Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45603
--- Comment #12 from Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-07-08
17:39:23 UTC ---
Author: jason
Date: Fri Jul 8 17:39:17 2011
New Revision: 176054
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=176054
Log:
PR c++/45603
*
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46779
--- Comment #11 from Georg-Johann Lay gjl at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-07-08
17:38:43 UTC ---
Author: gjl
Date: Fri Jul 8 17:38:39 2011
New Revision: 176053
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=176053
Log:
PR target/46779
*
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45603
Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46779
--- Comment #12 from Georg-Johann Lay gjl at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-07-08
17:46:42 UTC ---
Author: gjl
Date: Fri Jul 8 17:46:38 2011
New Revision: 176055
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=176055
Log:
PR target/46779
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45291
Georg-Johann Lay gjl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49679
Summary: Increment/decrement operator (++/--) not working as
expected
Product: gcc
Version: 4.5.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46779
Georg-Johann Lay gjl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||otaylor at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49679
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-07-08
17:55:35 UTC ---
You are invoking undefined behavior because C++ does not specify what order of
the operands happen first.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45437
Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49679
Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49679
--- Comment #3 from Jordan jordan_2000 at hotmail dot de 2011-07-08 18:32:55
UTC ---
I know the warnings, but look the code
a+=++a+a++;
b+=++b+b++;
cout a= a endl b= b endl;
cin a;
a and b must be the
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49679
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-07-08
18:37:41 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #3)
a and b must be the same.
No, it's undefined behaviour. Anything can happen.
20110704 (r175811) and 20110708 (r176045), IRIX 6.5 bootstrap got
broken.
A trivial a.out SEGVs in __register_frame_info_bases:
Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
__register_frame_info_bases (begin=0x10004604, ob=0x1000, tbase=0x0,
dbase=0x0) at /vol/gcc/src/hg/trunk
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49680
--- Comment #2 from Rainer Orth ro at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-07-08 19:04:13 UTC
---
Created attachment 24720
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24720
working assembler output
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49680
--- Comment #3 from Rainer Orth ro at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-07-08 19:04:45 UTC
---
Created attachment 24721
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24721
broken assembler output
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49680
--- Comment #1 from Rainer Orth ro at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-07-08 19:03:37 UTC
---
Created attachment 24719
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24719
preprocessed input
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49680
Rainer Orth ro at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.7.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49681
Summary: 4.6.1 cross-build fails in libquadmath/libiberty
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: bootstrap
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49682
Summary: [alpha] gcc-4.6.1: ICE at -O2 and -O3
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: rtl-optimization
AssignedTo:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49621
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-07-08
20:10:22 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri Jul 8 20:10:18 2011
New Revision: 176064
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=176064
Log:
PR target/49621
*
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49621
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-07-08
20:10:16 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri Jul 8 20:09:58 2011
New Revision: 176063
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=176063
Log:
PR target/49621
*
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49621
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[4.5/4.6/4.7 regression]|[4.5 regression]
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47230
Matt Turner mattst88 at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mattst88 at gmail
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49680
Hans-Peter Nilsson hp at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hp at gcc dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49513
Jeffrey A. Law law at redhat dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at redhat dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49680
--- Comment #5 from Hans-Peter Nilsson hp at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-07-08
21:27:01 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #4)
I see a similar build failure for cris-elf, FWIW so I take a wild guess and
assume it's the same issue.
...but in the case for
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49680
Richard Henderson rth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49680
--- Comment #7 from Hans-Peter Nilsson hp at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-07-08
22:08:31 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #6)
I see the problem wrt cris -- we really shouldn't delay the output
of the CFI note that late. I'll fix that and see if I can
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49680
--- Comment #8 from Richard Henderson rth at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-07-08
22:14:52 UTC ---
I'm pretty sure that tablejumps are required to be adjacent,
and that the notes are Really In the Wrong Place.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49680
--- Comment #9 from Hans-Peter Nilsson hp at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-07-08
22:30:34 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #8)
I'm pretty sure that tablejumps are required to be adjacent,
and that the notes are Really In the Wrong Place.
No real insns are
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49680
--- Comment #10 from Hans-Peter Nilsson hp at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-07-08
22:46:42 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #7)
I'm going to do s/PREV_INSN/prev_nonnote_nondebug_insn/g and assert that the
right insns and code_label is seen in
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49680
--- Comment #11 from Richard Henderson rth at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-07-08
23:03:59 UTC ---
HP, the CRIS problem is something else.
Basically, nonsense like
static void __attribute__((__used__)) call___do_global_dtors_aux (void) { asm
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49683
Summary: The system cannot execute the specified program
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49680
--- Comment #12 from Richard Henderson rth at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-07-08
23:36:57 UTC ---
Rainer, please give me the command-line for this. I can't seem to
reproduce the assembler warnings from a cross-compiler.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49519
Janis Johnson janis at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||janis at gcc dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49680
--- Comment #14 from Richard Henderson rth at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-07-08
23:49:01 UTC ---
Author: rth
Date: Fri Jul 8 23:48:59 2011
New Revision: 176066
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=176066
Log:
dwarf2cfi: Flush queued
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49680
--- Comment #13 from Richard Henderson rth at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-07-08
23:48:56 UTC ---
Author: rth
Date: Fri Jul 8 23:48:53 2011
New Revision: 176065
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=176065
Log:
dwarf2cfi: Insert notes
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49680
--- Comment #15 from Hans-Peter Nilsson hp at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-07-09
00:32:08 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #11)
Basically, nonsense like
static void __attribute__((__used__)) call___do_global_dtors_aux (void) { asm
(\t.section\t.fini);
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49684
Summary: [4.7 Regression]: build fails on crtstuff.c / crtbegin
using default CRT_CALL_STATIC_FUNCTION
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: build
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49685
Summary: libgcc_s.so not compiled without optimization when
requested
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49670
--- Comment #10 from Jeffrey Walton noloader at gmail dot com 2011-07-09
03:32:20 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #8)
The included source compiles OK for me with:
~/gcc-build/gcc/cc1plus -quiet -O2 -m32 -g -fstack-protector -march=prescott
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45437
--- Comment #17 from Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-07-09
03:33:56 UTC ---
Author: jason
Date: Sat Jul 9 03:33:54 2011
New Revision: 176072
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=176072
Log:
PR c++/45437
gcc/
*
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45437
Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
97 matches
Mail list logo
