http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51669
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51669
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-01-03
07:49:53 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Jan 3 07:49:48 2012
New Revision: 182828
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=182828
Log:
PR c++/51669
* semantics.c (finish_omp_clau
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51731
--- Comment #6 from M.L. Hekkelman 2012-01-03
07:44:55 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> (In reply to comment #4)
> > Following your logic, if I rewrite the code from:
> >
> > return data.e[-1];
> >
> > to
> >
> > int* ep = data.e;
> >
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51722
--- Comment #11 from Yuriy Lalym 2012-01-03 06:17:49
UTC ---
Created attachment 26227
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26227
And pch.ii
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51722
--- Comment #10 from Yuriy Lalym 2012-01-03 06:17:03
UTC ---
Created attachment 26226
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26226
only main with empty pch
main.cpp
int main()
{
return 0;
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51722
--- Comment #9 from Yuriy Lalym 2012-01-03 06:08:14
UTC ---
Created attachment 26225
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26225
And pch.ii
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51722
--- Comment #8 from Yuriy Lalym 2012-01-03 06:05:23
UTC ---
Created attachment 26224
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26224
new example
main.cpp
int main()
{
return 0;
}
---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51017
--- Comment #4 from Alexander Peslyak
2012-01-03 04:45:43 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> It might be interesting to get numbers for the trunk. There have been some
> register allocator fixes which might have improved this.
I've just tested
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51722
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hp at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #7
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51737
--- Comment #6 from Jens Müller 2012-01-03 04:17:07
UTC ---
Created attachment 26223
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26223
reduced testcase
OK, I don't get it any smaller ...
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51738
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51738
Bug #: 51738
Summary: C++11 initializer list does not work correctly with
operator[]
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45521
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||wangmianzhi1 at linuxmail
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51736
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48306
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
Summa
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51725
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48306
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-01-02
22:18:25 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Mon Jan 2 22:18:21 2012
New Revision: 182820
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=182820
Log:
* make-relative-prefix.c (make_relative_prefix_
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51725
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-01-02
22:17:05 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Mon Jan 2 22:17:02 2012
New Revision: 182819
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=182819
Log:
PR bootstrap/51725
* cselib.c (add_mem_for_
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15867
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|gcc-bugs at g
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51710
--- Comment #3 from Yuriy Solodkyy 2012-01-02
21:35:56 UTC ---
Thank you, I am aware of the workaround and that is exactly what I do in my
code, however I think the current behavior is counter intuitive:
1. I get error message about instantiatio
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51737
--- Comment #5 from Paolo Carlini 2012-01-02
21:22:46 UTC ---
Great ;) topformat is also useful, iterating between the two as explained in
the wiki, that is.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51737
--- Comment #4 from Jens Müller 2012-01-02 21:20:48
UTC ---
Thanks, delta is running. I'll send a result in a few hours :-)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51737
--- Comment #3 from Paolo Carlini 2012-01-02
20:40:31 UTC ---
Please, do your best to reduce the testcase to a manageable size, it's normally
rather doable with tools like delta:
http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/A_guide_to_testcase_reduction
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51676
--- Comment #3 from Ben Longbons 2012-01-02
20:27:41 UTC ---
I'm not familiar with GCC internals, but would it be as easy as adding and
using a second field for "first declaration"?
If the first (possibly only) declaration is the definition, the
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51737
--- Comment #2 from Jens Müller 2012-01-02 20:21:41
UTC ---
Someone on IRC confirmed that 4.6.2 also crashes.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51737
--- Comment #1 from Jens Müller 2012-01-02 20:10:51
UTC ---
Created attachment 26222
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26222
preprocessed source
(bzip2'ed because of excessive size)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51737
Bug #: 51737
Summary: g++ crashes (internal compiler error: Segmentation
fault) when compiling quickbook
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.1
Stat
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51681
Uros Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
URL||http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-p
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51731
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-01-02
19:32:08 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> Following your logic, if I rewrite the code from:
>
> return data.e[-1];
>
> to
>
> int* ep = data.e;
> return ep[-1];
>
> It would be valid, r
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51731
--- Comment #4 from M.L. Hekkelman 2012-01-02
19:08:10 UTC ---
Beste jakub,
maandag 2 januari 2012, 18:10:17, schreef je:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51731
> Jakub Jelinek changed:
>What|Removed
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51736
Bug #: 51736
Summary: generic fortran procedures with allocatable/pointer
argument
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51722
--- Comment #6 from Yuriy Lalym 2012-01-02 18:57:40
UTC ---
Created attachment 26220
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26220
For example in Comment 4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49110
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #13
-libstdcxx-allocator=new
--disable-libstdcxx-pch --enable-version-specific-runtime-libs
--program-suffix=-4.7 --enable-linux-futex --without-system-libunwind
--with-tune=core2 --build=x86_64-suse-linux
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.7.0 20120102 (experimental) (SUSE Linux)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51719
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|unassigned at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51689
--- Comment #1 from Paolo Carlini 2012-01-02
18:01:58 UTC ---
In this area we have also PR25137.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51322
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49204
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely 2012-01-02
17:56:19 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> We should also make std::async check the system load when deciding whether to
> run asynchronously or deferred. We should be able to reuse GNU Make's code
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51675
--- Comment #2 from Jason Merrill 2012-01-02
17:53:32 UTC ---
Author: jason
Date: Mon Jan 2 17:53:28 2012
New Revision: 182810
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=182810
Log:
DR 1359
PR c++/51675
* method.c (walk_f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51666
--- Comment #3 from Jason Merrill 2012-01-02
17:53:23 UTC ---
Author: jason
Date: Mon Jan 2 17:53:16 2012
New Revision: 182809
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=182809
Log:
DR 325
PR c++/51666
* parser.c (cp_pars
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47335
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48051
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||zeratul976 at hotmail dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51322
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49976
--- Comment #4 from Paolo Carlini 2012-01-02
17:44:09 UTC ---
Thanks Iain, if you could manage to test on the branch too - when possible - it
would be great. Or at some point we can as well close the issue as worksforme
in mainline, 4_6-branch is
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51151
--- Comment #7 from Ollie Wild 2012-01-02 17:35:07 UTC
---
I'm on vacation until Jan. 6.
For compiler related questions, please email c-compiler-t...@google.com.
If you need to contact a manager, please email lp-m...@google.com.
Thanks,
Ollie
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51151
--- Comment #6 from Paolo Carlini 2012-01-02
17:34:19 UTC ---
Andreas, can we close this?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49951
--- Comment #16 from Dodji Seketeli 2012-01-02
17:08:50 UTC ---
Author: dodji
Date: Mon Jan 2 17:08:45 2012
New Revision: 182807
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=182807
Log:
PR debug/49951 - jumpy stepping at end of scope i
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51462
Dodji Seketeli changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51731
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51731
--- Comment #2 from M.L. Hekkelman 2012-01-02
17:03:46 UTC ---
Beste paolo.carlini,
maandag 2 januari 2012, 17:23:42, schreef je:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51731
> --- Comment #1 from Paolo Carlini
> 2012-01-02 16:23:42 U
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46328
--- Comment #9 from Damian Rouson 2012-01-02
17:01:47 UTC ---
Thanks for the fix! I'm very excited about the way 4.7 is shaping up. It
appears this will be a very significant release for those interested in the
more advanced capabilities of OOP
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51462
--- Comment #1 from Dodji Seketeli 2012-01-02
17:00:21 UTC ---
Author: dodji
Date: Mon Jan 2 17:00:13 2012
New Revision: 182806
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=182806
Log:
PR c++/51462 - ICE in cx_check_missing_mem_inits
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51735
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51650
--- Comment #22 from Markus Trippelsdorf
2012-01-02 16:52:49 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #21)
> (In reply to comment #20)
> >
> > Fortunately it seems that this bug was the last issue that needed to be
> > fixed.
> > Firefox now builds fine wi
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51735
Andreas Krebbel changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||s390x-ibm-linux
Priority|P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51735
Bug #: 51735
Summary: [4.7 regression] stage 3 bootstrap failure compiling
tree-ssa-pre.c with r182760
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51669
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|unassigned at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51731
--- Comment #1 from Paolo Carlini 2012-01-02
16:23:42 UTC ---
Maybe I'm just tired (sorry in case) but I really don't see how this can
possibly work: *negative* index?!? Can you explain?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20140
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20140
--- Comment #4 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-01-02 16:15:55 UTC ---
Author: paolo
Date: Mon Jan 2 16:15:49 2012
New Revision: 182805
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=182805
Log:
/cp
2012-01-02 Paolo Carlini
PR
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51650
--- Comment #21 from Richard Guenther 2012-01-02
15:52:45 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #20)
>
> Fortunately it seems that this bug was the last issue that needed to be fixed.
> Firefox now builds fine with -lto and -g.
Can you also check the fo
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51669
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51722
--- Comment #4 from Yuriy Lalym 2012-01-02 15:16:03
UTC ---
main.cpp
---
#include
int main(int argc, char *argv[])
{
QCoreApplication a(argc, argv);
return a.exec();
}
---
pc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51722
--- Comment #3 from Yuriy Lalym 2012-01-02 15:06:30
UTC ---
Without PCH errors aren't present.
> all preprocessed headers to build the PCH
#include
It is enough one header for error origin.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51725
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #6 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51734
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.7.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51734
Bug #: 51734
Summary: [4.7 Regression] Bootstrap fails in libada
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: build
Severity
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51730
--- Comment #4 from Richard Guenther 2012-01-02
14:15:39 UTC ---
Like
Index: gcc/fold-const.c
===
--- gcc/fold-const.c(revision 182784)
+++ gcc/fold-const.c(working copy)
@@
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51733
--- Comment #2 from Tobias Burnus 2012-01-02
14:11:03 UTC ---
(Mixed up the test cases. The PR mentioned in comment 1 is the same as in
comment 0 - and a good test case. I mixed it up with PR 46262 comment 3, which
is a longer example which also
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51733
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
Blo
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51730
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51725
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-01-02
13:52:14 UTC ---
Seems that canonical vs. non-canonical VALUEs are mixed up.
In cselib_invalidate_mem, we don't terminate the loop:
addr = cselib_lookup (XEXP (x, 0), VOIDmode, 0, GET_MODE (x
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51725
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hp at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4 from
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51728
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51733
Bug #: 51733
Summary: [OOP] No allocate on assign for class objects with
allocatable components.
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCO
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51634
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pault at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1 fro
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45397
Kai Tietz changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ktietz at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #6 from
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51334
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51529
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51732
Bug #: 51732
Summary: typo in man gcc: "runt-time check"
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.3
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46262
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51730
--- Comment #2 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2012-01-02 13:03:35 UTC ---
On Mon, 2 Jan 2012, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> char digs[] = "0123456789";
> int xlcbug = 1 / (&(digs + 5)[-2 + (_Bool) 1] == &digs[4] ? 1 : -
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46328
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51052
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51345
--- Comment #4 from Georg-Johann Lay 2012-01-02
12:52:00 UTC ---
Author: gjl
Date: Mon Jan 2 12:51:57 2012
New Revision: 182797
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=182797
Log:
contrib/
PR target/51345
* gcc_update (fil
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46328
--- Comment #7 from Paul Thomas 2012-01-02 12:46:15
UTC ---
Author: pault
Date: Mon Jan 2 12:46:08 2012
New Revision: 182796
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=182796
Log:
2012-01-02 Paul Thomas
PR fortran/51529
*
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51052
--- Comment #8 from Paul Thomas 2012-01-02 12:46:16
UTC ---
Author: pault
Date: Mon Jan 2 12:46:08 2012
New Revision: 182796
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=182796
Log:
2012-01-02 Paul Thomas
PR fortran/51529
*
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46262
--- Comment #12 from Paul Thomas 2012-01-02 12:46:15
UTC ---
Author: pault
Date: Mon Jan 2 12:46:08 2012
New Revision: 182796
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=182796
Log:
2012-01-02 Paul Thomas
PR fortran/51529
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51529
--- Comment #6 from Paul Thomas 2012-01-02 12:46:14
UTC ---
Author: pault
Date: Mon Jan 2 12:46:08 2012
New Revision: 182796
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=182796
Log:
2012-01-02 Paul Thomas
PR fortran/51529
*
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51681
--- Comment #5 from Uros Bizjak 2012-01-02 12:35:25
UTC ---
Patch:
--cut here--
Index: ia64.c
===
--- ia64.c (revision 182780)
+++ ia64.c (working copy)
@@ -11085,7 +11085
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50410
--- Comment #11 from Tobias Burnus 2012-01-02
12:30:42 UTC ---
See also RFC patch: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2011-10/msg00136.html
and reply: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2011-10/msg00138.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51681
--- Comment #4 from Uros Bizjak 2012-01-02 12:31:24
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> FAIL: gcc.dg/torture/vshuf-v8qi.c -O2 execution test
It is not related to original failure; following patchlet fixes the failure:
--cut here--
@@ -11207,7
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51681
Uros Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|unassigned at g
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51731
Bug #: 51731
Summary: code generation bug in negative indices in arrays on
64-bit targets
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51730
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.7.0
--- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51730
Bug #: 51730
Summary: [4.7 Regression] autoconf 2.60 through 2.67 stdbool.h
check fails with GCC 4.7
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49951
--- Comment #15 from dodji at seketeli dot org
2012-01-02 12:01:45 UTC ---
> It would be very helpful to get this into 4.6.3 too if it's safe
Sure thing. I am currently testing the patch on 4.6. Thanks for the
head-up.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47477
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51729
--- Comment #1 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-01-02 11:33:39 UTC ---
Author: rsandifo
Date: Mon Jan 2 11:33:35 2012
New Revision: 182793
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=182793
Log:
gcc/testsuite/
PR target/51729
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51729
Bug #: 51729
Summary: dspr2-MULT.c and dspr2-MULTU.c fail for MIPS
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prior
1 - 100 of 130 matches
Mail list logo
