https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39772
Joost VandeVondele changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
Summary|add a correc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40165
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
--- Comment #12 from Domi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50201
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31190
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
--- Comment #9 from Domin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50201
--- Comment #18 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: kargl
Date: Sat Dec 5 23:33:23 2015
New Revision: 231323
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=231323&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2015-12-05 Juoko Orava
PR fortran/50201
* io
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38724
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68468
Waldemar Brodkorb changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|frv |frv bfin
Summary|frv tool
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42478
Bug 42478 depends on bug 40876, which changed state.
Bug 40876 Summary: OpenMP private variable referenced in a statement function
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40876
What|Removed |Added
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38724
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||longb at cray dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40876
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68711
--- Comment #3 from Martin Sebor ---
Patch posted for review:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-12/msg00662.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38724
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
--- Comment #10 from Domi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31393
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31243
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
--- Comment #12 from Domi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39772
--- Comment #12 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
Related to pr31243 for LEN.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46496
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||19276
--- Comment #2 from Dominiq
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67542
--- Comment #3 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> I don't get any internal compiler error for the test in comment 0 from 4.8
> up to trunk (6.0).
This is not true if I compile the test with -g up to revision r224160
(2015-06-05, ICE), but is true a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68300
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52788
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
--- Comment #3 from Domin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39772
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
--- Comment #11 from Domi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30802
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||
--- Comment #5 from Dominique d'
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31059
--- Comment #7 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
Note that the test in comment is valid Fortran 2003 (-frealloc-lhs). The tests
have to be compiled with -fno-realloc-lhs.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32317
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tobias.burnus at physik dot
fu-be
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27766
Bug 27766 depends on bug 27989, which changed state.
Bug 27989 Summary: -fbounds-check should check for too small arrays on
subroutine calls
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27989
What|Removed |Adde
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27989
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32317
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
--- Comment #9 from Domin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68731
Bug ID: 68731
Summary: [concepts] ICE when referencing struct type in
specialization
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68730
Bug ID: 68730
Summary: wrong code at -O3 on x86_64-linux-gnu (in 32-bit mode)
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compone
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68729
John David Anglin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68729
Bug ID: 68729
Summary: ../Xbae/Methods.c:1772:1: ICE: in extract_insn, at
recog.c:2343
Product: gcc
Version: 5.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68728
Bug ID: 68728
Summary: ice: unexpected expression ‘(const char*)__s’ of kind
implicit_conv_expr
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68711
--- Comment #2 from Martin Sebor ---
The patch in comment #1 fixes it. Unfortunately, there are other expressions
that cause the same problem even in prior versions of GCC. Since those were
accepted even prior to r230365, and in fact are accept
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68727
Bug ID: 68727
Summary: [4.9 regression] invalid offsetof expressions accepted
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compone
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68726
Bug ID: 68726
Summary: ice: tree check: expected tree_vec, have error_mark in
comp_template_args_with_info, at cp/pt.c:7890
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39756
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
--- Comment #9 from Eric Botcazou -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68725
Bug ID: 68725
Summary: suboptimal handling of constant compound literals
Product: gcc
Version: 5.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39756
--- Comment #8 from dave.anglin at bell dot net ---
It fails on hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.11. See for example:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2015-12/msg00395.html
--
John David Anglin dave.ang...@bell.net
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68724
Bug ID: 68724
Summary: ice in unify, at cp/pt.c:19902
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assign
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38325
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
--- Comment #5 from Eric Botcazou -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39756
--- Comment #7 from Eric Botcazou ---
On which platform exactly? I have never seen it...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68723
Bug ID: 68723
Summary: ice in pop_nested_namespace, at cp/name-lookup.c:3816
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Componen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38229
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38325
--- Comment #4 from Bechir Zalila ---
(In reply to Eric Botcazou from comment #3)
> Is this still a problem?
Sorry, I no longer have access to a FreeBSD machine to check this.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68711
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50201
--- Comment #17 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: kargl
Date: Sat Dec 5 18:12:26 2015
New Revision: 231320
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=231320&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2015-12-05 Juoko Orava
PR fortran/50201
* io
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41416
Arnaud Charlet changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52251
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42148
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42141
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42073
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41854
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41845
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41416
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39290
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot
ethz
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20896
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|FIXED |DUPLICATE
--- Comment #17 from Jerry DeL
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41286
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41040
--- Comment #2 from Eric Botcazou ---
*** Bug 41041 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39756
--- Comment #6 from dave.anglin at bell dot net ---
Yes.
--
John David Anglin dave.ang...@bell.net
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41041
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68713
Dâniel Fraga changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40936
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40984
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40933
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40932
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40931
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40929
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40310
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40285
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40185
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68722
Bug ID: 68722
Summary: internal compiler error: in
merge_exception_specifiers, at cp/typeck2.c:2108
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: norm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40025
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39793
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39756
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39174
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38229
--- Comment #4 from dave.anglin at bell dot net ---
On 2015-12-05, at 12:14 PM, ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> Is this still a problem?
It is no longer a problem on hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.11.
--
John David Anglin dave.ang...@bell.net
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39160
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38974
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38882
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38874
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38511
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38493
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68676
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38349
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38332
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38330
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38329
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38327
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38325
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68560
--- Comment #16 from Mikael Morin ---
(In reply to Mikael Morin from comment #15)
> (In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #12)
> > > Looks like it's PR68540.
> >
> > So it should work now?
> >
> I have yet to find the best way to insta
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38315
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38229
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38009
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37956
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37796
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68676
--- Comment #6 from Paul Thomas ---
Author: pault
Date: Sat Dec 5 17:10:33 2015
New Revision: 231319
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=231319&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2015-12-05 Paul Thomas
PR fortran/68676
* decl.c (gfc_ma
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68721
Bug ID: 68721
Summary: wrong code at -Os and above on x86_64-linux-gnu
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: rtl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36638
--- Comment #2 from dave.anglin at bell dot net ---
On 2015-12-05, at 11:44 AM, ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> Is this still a problem?
I haven't checked recently. The breakage in PR 60403 broke build.
--
John David Anglin dave.an
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37620
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37619
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37618
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
1 - 100 of 212 matches
Mail list logo