http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49452
--- Comment #14 from Eric Botcazou 2011-07-15
06:26:17 UTC ---
> Instruction 2 and 24 refer to the same location, but have different offset
> relative to FP because the call to y changes FP. DSE doesn't (and can not, if
> it is intra-procedural)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49754
Summary: Let gcc warn about all uninitialized variables
Product: gcc
Version: 4.5.1
URL: https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=705160#c1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhan
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48711
--- Comment #14 from Eric Botcazou 2011-07-15
05:53:20 UTC ---
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Fri Jul 15 05:53:13 2011
New Revision: 176306
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=176306
Log:
PR ada/48711
* g-socthi-mingw.adb (Fil
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48711
--- Comment #13 from Eric Botcazou 2011-07-15
05:52:08 UTC ---
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Fri Jul 15 05:52:04 2011
New Revision: 176305
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=176305
Log:
PR ada/48711
* g-socthi-mingw.adb (Fil
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49741
--- Comment #5 from Jack Howarth 2011-07-15
05:31:40 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> Created attachment 24772 [details]
> Patch to use --zadditional_options instead of --tool_opts
>
> Does this work better?
Yes. This eliminates the failures
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49741
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49741
--- Comment #3 from Jason Merrill 2011-07-15
03:44:30 UTC ---
Hmm, it seems that --tool_opts confuses the multilib support. In g++.exp we
have
if [info exists TOOL_OPTIONS] {
lappend ALWAYS_CXXFLAGS "additional_flags=[g++_in
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43772
--- Comment #8 from eggert at gnu dot org 2011-07-15 03:01:42 UTC ---
The problem persists in GCC 4.6.1 (x86-64):
$ cat >t.c
long long
emacs_lseek (int fd, long long offset, int whence)
{
return -1-9223372036854775807LL <= offset && offset <= 92
res, I see...
Using
/sw/src/fink.build/gcc47-4.7.0-1000/gcc-4.7-20110714/gcc/testsuite/config/default.exp
as tool-and-target-specific interface file.
Running
/sw/src/fink.build/gcc47-4.7.0-1000/gcc-4.7-20110714/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/bprob/bprob.exp
...
set_ld_library_path_env_vars:
ld_library_path=.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46350
John David Anglin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46350
--- Comment #8 from John David Anglin 2011-07-15
02:37:27 UTC ---
Author: danglin
Date: Fri Jul 15 02:37:23 2011
New Revision: 176304
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=176304
Log:
PR ada/46350
* s-taprop-hpux-dce.adb
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46350
--- Comment #7 from John David Anglin 2011-07-15
02:35:08 UTC ---
Author: danglin
Date: Fri Jul 15 02:35:05 2011
New Revision: 176303
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=176303
Log:
PR ada/46350
* s-taprop-hpux-dce.adb
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49742
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Co
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49742
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Stat
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48065
--- Comment #4 from Dmitry Gorbachev
2011-07-15 00:01:49 UTC ---
Still in GCC 4.6 (when checking is turned on).
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46798
--- Comment #6 from Dmitry Gorbachev
2011-07-15 00:01:39 UTC ---
> I can't reproduce it with recent GCC 4.6 / 4.7.
Ahh, still fails in 4.6, when checking is turned on.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49742
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ramana at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comm
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46798
--- Comment #5 from Dmitry Gorbachev
2011-07-14 23:25:26 UTC ---
I can't reproduce it with recent GCC 4.6 / 4.7.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46350
--- Comment #6 from John David Anglin 2011-07-14
23:22:20 UTC ---
Author: danglin
Date: Thu Jul 14 23:22:17 2011
New Revision: 176296
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=176296
Log:
PR ada/46350
* s-taprop-hpux-dce.adb
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47936
Dmitry Gorbachev changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||4.7.0
--- Comment #6 from Dmitry Gorba
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48065
--- Comment #3 from Dmitry Gorbachev
2011-07-14 23:14:33 UTC ---
I can't reproduce it now.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47727
--- Comment #10 from hjl at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-07-14
22:50:29 UTC ---
Author: hjl
Date: Thu Jul 14 22:50:26 2011
New Revision: 176289
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=176289
Log:
Permute the conversion and addition for zer
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49753
Summary: FAIL: g++.dg/torture/pr49309.C
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: testsuite
AssignedTo: unassig...@gcc.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49752
Summary: Non-existing struct `tree_type' in fold_checksum_tree
in fold-const.c, can't build with
`--enable-checking=fold'
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCON
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48711
--- Comment #12 from Rainer Emrich 2011-07-14
22:16:13 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #11)
> (In reply to comment #10)
> > (In reply to comment #9)
> > > (In reply to comment #8)
> > > > Thanks for reporting the problem and tracking down the fix.
>
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49452
--- Comment #13 from Easwaran Raman 2011-07-14
22:10:16 UTC ---
I looked at the dumps for 920501-7.c and second invocation of DSE removes a
necessary store. The relevant dump for function x from
920501-7.c.198r.pro_and_epilogue is below:
(insn 2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49140
Sébastien Kunz-Jacques changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||grokbrsm at free dot fr
--- Comm
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48711
--- Comment #11 from Rainer Emrich 2011-07-14
22:08:24 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #10)
> (In reply to comment #9)
> > (In reply to comment #8)
> > > Thanks for reporting the problem and tracking down the fix.
> >
> > Now I get:
> >
> > g-soct
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49746
--- Comment #3 from dave.anglin at bell dot net 2011-07-14 22:06:49 UTC ---
On 7/14/2011 4:35 PM, sje at cup dot hp.com wrote:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49746
>
> --- Comment #2 from Steve Ellcey 2011-07-14 20:34:28
> UTC ---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48711
--- Comment #10 from Rainer Emrich 2011-07-14
22:02:51 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #9)
> (In reply to comment #8)
> > Thanks for reporting the problem and tracking down the fix.
>
> Now I get:
>
> g-socthi.adb:280:01: (style) horizontal tab no
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49745
--- Comment #14 from Paolo Carlini 2011-07-14
21:58:55 UTC ---
Sure Jakub. I was only wondering if maybe, after all these years, turns out
that libobjc doesn't really need that include anymore. We could simplify the
macros a bit...
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48711
Rainer Emrich changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Resolution|FIXED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49745
--- Comment #13 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-07-14
21:54:36 UTC ---
I think only libstdc++ installs the gthr* headers, all other uses inside of gcc
just include it in library *.c files rather than headers, so for _LIBOBJC it
IMHO shouldn't be harmful
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49745
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org |nicola.pero@meta-innovation
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48220
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
AssignedTo|ebotcazou at gcc d
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49688
--- Comment #14 from Richard Henderson 2011-07-14
21:34:16 UTC ---
Well, .cfi handling in gas isn't totally untested because
there's plenty of glibc asm files that use it.
But I have to concede that there might be a bug. We'll
have to examine
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49688
--- Comment #13 from Uros Bizjak 2011-07-14 21:27:52
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #12)
> Just guessing now, but you might also want to try a different version of
> binutils - maybe there's a problem with .cfi directive handling?
Due to some othe
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49688
--- Comment #12 from Bernd Schmidt 2011-07-14
21:21:15 UTC ---
Just guessing now, but you might also want to try a different version of
binutils - maybe there's a problem with .cfi directive handling?
Or maybe this has just never been tested wit
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49688
--- Comment #11 from Uros Bizjak 2011-07-14 21:12:13
UTC ---
Created attachment 24771
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24771
asm source at r176020
Indeed, reverting the patch from Comment 10 fixed cleanup-10.c execution
failur
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36966
Matt Turner changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mattst88 at gmail dot com
--- Comment #3 fr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49741
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49629
Pat Haugen changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bergner at gcc dot gnu.org,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49629
--- Comment #2 from Pat Haugen 2011-07-14
21:08:53 UTC ---
Created attachment 24770
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24770
reduced testcase
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49309
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49309
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski 2011-07-14
20:55:42 UTC ---
Author: pinskia
Date: Thu Jul 14 20:55:38 2011
New Revision: 176282
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=176282
Log:
2011-07-14 Andrew Pinski
PR tree-opt/4930
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49688
--- Comment #10 from Bernd Schmidt 2011-07-14
20:40:40 UTC ---
Well, the new use of .cfi directives probably comes from this bit that was
committed in between the two revisions:
Index: gcc/config/alpha/elf.h
=
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49688
--- Comment #9 from Richard Henderson 2011-07-14
20:37:12 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> Are you sure these were configured the same way? One of the output files is
> using .cfi directives while the other isn't.
Lack of .cfi was caused by th
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49746
Steve Ellcey changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dave.anglin at bell dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49688
--- Comment #8 from Uros Bizjak 2011-07-14 20:34:03
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> Are you sure these were configured the same way? One of the output files is
> using .cfi directives while the other isn't.
Yes, compiler is configured and bui
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49688
--- Comment #7 from Uros Bizjak 2011-07-14 20:32:01
UTC ---
Created attachment 24769
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24769
Preprocessed source.
Gzipped cleanup-10.i preprocessed source.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49309
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski 2011-07-14
20:26:46 UTC ---
Fixed on the trunk will apply to the 4.6 branch soon.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49309
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski 2011-07-14
20:23:39 UTC ---
Author: pinskia
Date: Thu Jul 14 20:23:36 2011
New Revision: 176281
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=176281
Log:
2011-07-14 Andrew Pinski
PR tree-opt/4930
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49629
Eric Weddington changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49751
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49688
--- Comment #6 from Bernd Schmidt 2011-07-14
20:16:38 UTC ---
Are you sure these were configured the same way? One of the output files is
using .cfi directives while the other isn't.
Could you post a .i file? cleanup-10.c needs headers...
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49688
--- Comment #5 from Uros Bizjak 2011-07-14 19:57:21
UTC ---
Created attachment 24768
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24768
good executable, contents of the .eh_frame section
good: file format elf64-alpha
Contents of the
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49688
--- Comment #4 from Uros Bizjak 2011-07-14 19:56:17
UTC ---
Created attachment 24767
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24767
bad executable, contents of the .eh_frame section
bad: file format elf64-alpha
Contents of the .e
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49688
Uros Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49688
--- Comment #2 from Uros Bizjak 2011-07-14 19:39:17
UTC ---
Created attachment 24766
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24766
asm source that compiles to good executable
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49688
--- Comment #1 from Uros Bizjak 2011-07-14 19:37:30
UTC ---
Created attachment 24765
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24765
asm source that compiles to good executable
This asm was produced by compiling gcc.dg/cleanup-10.c wit
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49749
--- Comment #3 from William J. Schmidt 2011-07-14
19:24:19 UTC ---
Created attachment 24762
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24762
Gimple following reassoc2 with MEM_REFs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49749
--- Comment #4 from William J. Schmidt 2011-07-14
19:25:18 UTC ---
Created attachment 24763
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24763
Gimple prior to expand, r161839
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49749
--- Comment #5 from William J. Schmidt 2011-07-14
19:25:51 UTC ---
Created attachment 24764
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24764
Gimple prior to expand, r161840
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49749
--- Comment #2 from William J. Schmidt 2011-07-14
19:23:29 UTC ---
Created attachment 24761
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24761
Gimple following reassoc2 with TARGET_MEM_REFs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49749
--- Comment #1 from William J. Schmidt 2011-07-14
19:22:08 UTC ---
Created attachment 24760
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24760
Gimple prior to reassoc2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49751
--- Comment #1 from Blaies Gassend 2011-07-14
18:49:59 UTC ---
Created attachment 24759
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24759
The sample program that fails.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49751
Summary: Incorrect optimization related to smallest int64_t
value.
Product: gcc
Version: 4.4.3
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49687
Eric Weddington changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49750
Summary: -gdwarf-4 bug
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: debug
AssignedTo: unassig...@gcc.gnu.org
Rep
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49687
--- Comment #2 from Eric Weddington
2011-07-14 18:41:56 UTC ---
Created attachment 24758
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24758
Test case results using GCC 4.3.3 (WinAVR 20100110)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49491
Eric Weddington changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49735
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski 2011-07-14
18:26:54 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> It probably papers over a different issue though - even recursive inlining
> should be limited by a --param, but appearantly that is not working here.
>
> H
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49541
--- Comment #10 from Rainer Orth 2011-07-14 17:40:06
UTC ---
Created attachment 24757
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24757
proposed libgomp testsuite patch
Here's the libgomp testsuite part of the patch. It should apply to b
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49748
--- Comment #2 from Alain Knaff 2011-07-14
17:38:59 UTC ---
Created attachment 24756
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24756
Test program for const warning bug
> the warning is correct, see http://c-faq.com/ansi/constmismatch.h
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49541
--- Comment #9 from Rainer Orth 2011-07-14 17:37:43 UTC
---
Created attachment 24755
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24755
proposed 4.6 patch
Here's the 4.6 backport of the sol2.h patch. Could you please give it a try on
Sol
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38159
--- Comment #4 from Georg-Johann Lay 2011-07-14
17:28:07 UTC ---
Must be new artifact,
r176217 fails and my local 176136 passes.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49665
Pat Haugen changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #7 fr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49452
--- Comment #12 from Easwaran Raman 2011-07-14
17:16:06 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #11)
> I have confirmed that the -Os failures began with r175063 and that the tests
> pass for several revision before that and pass for several after, so it's
>
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38159
Eric Weddington changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11320
--- Comment #10 from Bernd Schmidt 2011-07-14
17:06:38 UTC ---
Author: bernds
Date: Thu Jul 14 17:06:33 2011
New Revision: 176280
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=176280
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/11320
* config/ia64/i
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49541
--- Comment #8 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE 2011-07-14 17:08:09 UTC ---
> Same here, but the link line starts with:
>
> /nile.build/botcazou/gcc-head/sparc-sun-solaris2.8/gcc/collect2 -V -Y
> P,/lib/sparcv9:/usr/lib/sparcv9 -Qy -o ./con
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49749
Summary: Reassociation rank algorithm does not include all
non-NULL operands
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44506
Eric Weddington changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49748
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-07-14
16:44:08 UTC ---
the bug reporting guidelines clearly ask for a complete and self-contained test
case, not several snippets of code which don't form a complete program
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs/
the w
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49748
Summary: char * const * cannot be assigned to char const *
const *
Product: gcc
Version: 4.4.3
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41426
Ville Voutilainen changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ville.voutilainen at gmail
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44506
Georg-Johann Lay changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gjl at gcc dot gnu.org
Known to w
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49487
Georg-Johann Lay changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49487
--- Comment #6 from Georg-Johann Lay 2011-07-14
15:15:31 UTC ---
Author: gjl
Date: Thu Jul 14 15:15:28 2011
New Revision: 176277
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=176277
Log:
PR target/49487
Backport from mainline r1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49487
--- Comment #5 from Georg-Johann Lay 2011-07-14
15:10:17 UTC ---
Author: gjl
Date: Thu Jul 14 15:10:12 2011
New Revision: 176276
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=176276
Log:
PR target/49487
* config/avr/avr.md (rotl
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49651
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||4.6.2, 4.7.0
Summary|[4.4/4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49747
--- Comment #2 from douganla at gru dot com 2011-07-14 14:57:47 UTC ---
gcc-4.4.5 is the latest version available in gentoo
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49732
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||4.5.4
Known to fail|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49651
--- Comment #12 from Richard Guenther 2011-07-14
14:56:30 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Thu Jul 14 14:56:27 2011
New Revision: 176275
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=176275
Log:
2011-07-14 Richard Guenther
PR tree-o
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49651
--- Comment #11 from Richard Guenther 2011-07-14
14:53:33 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Thu Jul 14 14:53:30 2011
New Revision: 176274
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=176274
Log:
2011-07-14 Richard Guenther
PR tree-o
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49747
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-07-14
14:49:53 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #0)
> After emerging sys-devel/gcc-4.4.5 on Gentoo Linux kernel-2.6.38-gentoo-r6
What does this mean? Not everyone uses gentoo or wants to understand its pkg
s
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49732
--- Comment #8 from Vorfeed Canal 2011-07-14
14:43:49 UTC ---
It makes sense because patch which "fixes" the problem effectively removes the
information needed to do overflow check.
And now, when I know where to look is much smaller reproducer:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49732
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Known to work|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49732
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|unassigned at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49732
--- Comment #6 from Vorfeed Canal 2011-07-14
13:52:07 UTC ---
Ah-ha. Here we go:
gcc -c -O0 -gnato -I- -gnatA
/ncplc/src/sysnative-prencurses-5.9/Ada95/src/terminal_interface-curses-menus.adb
raised STORAGE_ERROR : stack overflow (or erroneous
1 - 100 of 163 matches
Mail list logo
