https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50462
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65558
Bug ID: 65558
Summary: crash using __attribute__((__abi_tag__)) on anonymous
inline namespace
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53727
--- Comment #10 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com ---
Is this still an issue?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55206
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65558
Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65561
Bug ID: 65561
Summary: avx512fintrin.h:5344:1: internal compiler error: in
curr_insn_transform, at lra-constraints.c:3494
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65551
vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57678
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65536
--- Comment #35 from Jan Hubicka hubicka at ucw dot cz ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65536
--- Comment #31 from Martin Liška marxin at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Beginning of the difference of ODR warnings:
210,211c210,211
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61652
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org ---
You don't need to use --enable-libstdcxx-debug-flags, the default is to build
the debug libs with -g3 -O0 anyway, and that works fine for me. Maybe using
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65560
Bug ID: 65560
Summary: pr24683.c:11:1: internal compiler error: in
extract_insn, at recog.c:2343
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30277
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53814
--- Comment #4 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com ---
Can we resolve this?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60019
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ai.azuma
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65553
W E Brown webrown.cpp at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||andrew.n.sutton
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54987
--- Comment #3 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org paolo at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: paolo
Date: Wed Mar 25 17:14:40 2015
New Revision: 221668
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=221668root=gccview=rev
Log:
2015-03-25 Paolo Carlini
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55822
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65558
Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59703
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52099
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65551
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org ---
And powerpc64le-unknown-linux-gnu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=6
Markus Trippelsdorf trippels at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65558
--- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org ---
If it is correct to ignore the abi_tag on an anonymous namespace (docs say The
ABI tags apply to a name...), then:
--- a/gcc/cp/name-lookup.c
+++ b/gcc/cp/name-lookup.c
@@ -3663,6
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65558
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Marek Polacek from comment #2)
If it is correct to ignore the abi_tag on an anonymous namespace
It's correct, anything in an anon namespace cannot be named outside the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65562
Bug ID: 65562
Summary: chkp-lifetime-1.c:17:1: internal compiler error: in
size_binop_loc, at fold-const.c:1761
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65564
Bug ID: 65564
Summary: builtin-bnd-narrow-ptr-bounds-2-nov.c:15:1: internal
compiler error: in simplify_subreg, at
simplify-rtx.c:5745
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65566
Bug ID: 65566
Summary: thread-local-var-1-lbv.c:34:1: internal compiler
error: Segmentation fault
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65563
Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65568
Bug ID: 65568
Summary: ptrmem8.C:9:9: internal compiler error: in
build_ptrmemfunc, at cp/typeck.c:7940
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65569
Michael Meissner meissner at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65569
Bug ID: 65569
Summary: Fix for PR target/65240 causes a regression in
building Spec for power4/power5/power6
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65554
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65279
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: redi
Date: Wed Mar 25 19:35:45 2015
New Revision: 221670
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=221670root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/65279
*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61652
Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59312
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58144
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=6
Markus Trippelsdorf trippels at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|5.0 |---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55382
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53162
--- Comment #2 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com ---
Jon, this seems fixed to me in 5.0.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65565
Bug ID: 65565
Summary: Bogus Sequential READ or WRITE after EOF after error
condition
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65569
--- Comment #1 from Michael Meissner meissner at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 35139
-- https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35139action=edit
Polynomial.ii file to show the problem
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65554
Markus Trippelsdorf trippels at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|5.0 |---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65558
--- Comment #5 from Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org ---
That patch is OK.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59703
--- Comment #2 from Daniel Krügler daniel.kruegler at googlemail dot com ---
(In reply to Paolo Carlini from comment #1)
This worksforme with the released 4.9.0.
Agreed, I found it working in 4.9.0, 4.9.1, 4.9.2, and in HEAD 5.0.0 20150325
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65537
Uroš Bizjak ubizjak at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65567
Bug ID: 65567
Summary: ERROR: tcl error sourcing
/test/gnu/gcc/gcc/libffi/testsuite/libffi.complex/comp
lex.exp
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65552
Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65559
Kai Tietz ktietz at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53017
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||aanisimov
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65560
Kai Tietz ktietz at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65564
Kai Tietz ktietz at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65559
--- Comment #2 from Rainer Emrich rai...@emrich-ebersheim.de ---
(In reply to Kai Tietz from comment #1)
Yeah, I noticed such failures too.
AFAI researched them, they are related to out-of-stack issues.
The problem seems to be that within
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65563
Jerry DeLisle jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvdelisle at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65563
Bug ID: 65563
Summary: Segfault on reopening fort.xxx file with explicit name
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65565
Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59513
Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tkoenig
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65561
Kai Tietz ktietz at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ktietz at gcc dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65556
Markus Trippelsdorf trippels at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|5.0 |---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65554
--- Comment #4 from Matthias Klose doko at gcc dot gnu.org ---
wasn't sure if I should file these as regressions. first time a build with
--enable-checking=yes, but it looks to me like a regression compared to a 4.9
--enable-checking=release
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65076
Jan Hubicka hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||enkovich.gnu at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53162
Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65570
Ian Lance Taylor ian at airs dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59703
--- Comment #3 from Peter A. Bigot pab at pabigot dot com ---
It also works for me on released 4.9.2; presumably it was fixed prior to 4.9.0
release as the date of the report suggests I was using trunk gcc at the time.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65564
--- Comment #2 from Kai Tietz ktietz at gcc dot gnu.org ---
As more I look as more I guess it is related to recent pic-code changes in
i386.c for Darwin.
I will check at what places we now assume that for PIC (especially for UNSPEC
UNSPEC_PCREL)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65536
--- Comment #37 from Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Jan Hubicka from comment #36)
Here we seem to sometimes affect ORDINARY_MAP_NUMBER_OF_COLUMN_BITS of an
existing line map. How that can work? We already have
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61670
Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65536
Jan Hubicka hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65573
Bug ID: 65573
Summary: 13908.C:20:33: internal compiler error: in
cp_build_addr_expr_1, at cp/typeck.c:5527
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65570
Bug ID: 65570
Summary: cannot find package runtime/cgo
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: go
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65558
--- Comment #6 from Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: mpolacek
Date: Wed Mar 25 20:08:05 2015
New Revision: 221672
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=221672root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR c++/65558
* name-lookup.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65571
Bug ID: 65571
Summary: [4.8/4.9 Regression] ICE for array of a derived type
with allocatable array in derived type object
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63657
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||galdralag
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61935
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65570
--- Comment #1 from ian at gcc dot gnu.org ian at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: ian
Date: Wed Mar 25 21:19:01 2015
New Revision: 221673
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=221673root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR go/65570
libgo/Makefile.am: add
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65572
Bug ID: 65572
Summary: ptrmem5.C:7:26: internal compiler error: in
gimplify_expr, at gimplify.c:8629
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65547
--- Comment #6 from Edward Diener eldlistmailingz at tropicsoft dot com ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #4)
(In reply to Edward Diener from comment #3)
Where do you get the idea that the standard doesn't require an error, it
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61670
--- Comment #7 from Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: mpolacek
Date: Wed Mar 25 20:06:24 2015
New Revision: 221671
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=221671root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR c++/61670
* class.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65569
--- Comment #2 from Michael Meissner meissner at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 35141
-- https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35141action=edit
Proposed patch to fix the problem
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65558
Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65544
--- Comment #3 from Thomas Pöchtrager t.poechtrager at gmail dot com ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #2)
Can you verify if the cross compiler uses a linker-plugin by specifying
-fuse-linker-plugin? Without that errors like this
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65279
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: redi
Date: Wed Mar 25 22:58:55 2015
New Revision: 221676
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=221676root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/65279
*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65547
--- Comment #7 from Edward Diener eldlistmailingz at tropicsoft dot com ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #5)
And as has been documented forever, the way to get diagnostics for GNU
extensions that contradict the ISO standard is the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65526
--- Comment #2 from Martin Sebor msebor at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: msebor
Date: Wed Mar 25 23:35:54 2015
New Revision: 221677
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=221677root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR testsuite/65526
* lib/target-supports.exp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65536
--- Comment #44 from Jan Hubicka hubicka at ucw dot cz ---
Ah, ok, it seems to work now. It just takes ages to print the lto1 line and it
get printed way after the lto1 process is running already.
Yep, really anoying property that the stderr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65547
--- Comment #8 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Edward Diener from comment #7)
So the GNU extension in this case is that the programmer does not have to
pass an argument when a variadic parameter is used in a macro
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65536
--- Comment #39 from Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Jan Hubicka from comment #36)
Manuel,
I returned back looking for reason lines are going out wrong when we get
short on locators. I do not understand the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65177
Sebastian Pop spop at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65559
Jan Hubicka hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka at gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65526
Martin Sebor msebor at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65526
Martin Sebor msebor at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65574
Bug ID: 65574
Summary: assembler options don't match predefined macros
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65574
Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65341
Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amodra at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65536
--- Comment #43 from Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Jan Hubicka from comment #40)
Manuel,
the following way you get the lto1 invocation:
Ah, ok, it seems to work now. It just takes ages to print the lto1 line and
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65279
Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65536
--- Comment #40 from Jan Hubicka hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Manuel,
the following way you get the lto1 invocation:
jan@linux-qos1:~ gcc t.c -flto -O2 -c
jan@linux-qos1:~ gcc t.o -flto -O2 --verbose -save-temps 21 | grep lto1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65536
--- Comment #42 from Jan Hubicka hubicka at ucw dot cz ---
Hi,
I read linemap_line_start and I think I noticed few issues with respect
to overflows and lines being added randomly.
1) line_delta is computed as to_line SOURCE_LINE (map,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65341
--- Comment #19 from Martin Sebor msebor at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Glibc bug #18116 tracks the discussion of the build failure (and the proposed
fix) there:
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18116
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65076
--- Comment #21 from Jan Hubicka hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Actually, looking at the code, I do not think we want full pure/const pass
(that build loops and attmepts to prove finiteness). We only want to run
nothrow discovery that is a lot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65576
Bug ID: 65576
Summary: ICE in gcc.c-torture/compile/pr33855.c
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
101 - 200 of 224 matches
Mail list logo