https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89712
Bug ID: 89712
Summary: Documentation for GCC => 8.0 contains unsupported
options
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priori
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89711
Bug ID: 89711
Summary: ICE in insert_vi_for_tree, at
tree-ssa-structalias.c:2832
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89710
Bug ID: 89710
Summary: ICE in dyn_cast(gimple*) /
should_duplicate_loop_header_p
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84396
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89688
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
See Also|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80604
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86521
--- Comment #8 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Wed Mar 13 23:34:51 2019
New Revision: 269667
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269667&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/86521 - C++17 copy elision in initialization by constructor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89546
--- Comment #8 from Martin Jambor ---
Created attachment 45964
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=45964&action=edit
x86_64 testcase
It took me four or five evenings and is quite fragile, but finally I have an
x86_64-linux testc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88588
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85860
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89709
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89709
--- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Started with r267272.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89709
Volker Reichelt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |9.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89709
Bug ID: 89709
Summary: [9 Regression] ICE with constexpr and "-O"
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
Severity: normal
Pri
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67740
--- Comment #3 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to anlauf from comment #2)
> The dump-tree looks funny: it appears that in the last test
>
> print *, "Associated contents?", associated(p1%string, p2%string)
>
> the association is a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89708
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89700
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
You're mistaken.
struct X
{
std::string str = "not empty";
X() = default;
X(const X&) = default;
};
This type does not have a move constructor. Copying an rvalue will perform a
copy (not a move):
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87673
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87673
--- Comment #13 from Thomas Koenig ---
Author: tkoenig
Date: Wed Mar 13 22:15:33 2019
New Revision: 269666
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269666&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2019-03-13 Thomas Koenig
PR fortran/87673
Backport
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87673
--- Comment #12 from Thomas Koenig ---
Author: tkoenig
Date: Wed Mar 13 22:05:59 2019
New Revision: 269665
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269665&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2019-03-13 Thomas Koenig
PR fortran/87673
Backport
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87045
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87045
--- Comment #4 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: anlauf
Date: Wed Mar 13 21:33:27 2019
New Revision: 269664
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269664&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2019-03-13 Harald Anlauf
PR fortran/87045
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68138
Harald van Dijk changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||harald at gigawatt dot nl
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86438
John David Anglin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2018-07-09 00:00:00 |2019-3-13
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89498
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[8/9 Regression] ICE in |[8 Regression] ICE in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88990
--- Comment #1 from Iain Buclaw ---
Doesn't look like invalid code, but 'extern' is propagated erroneously to all
declarations inside the block, even paraneters, which is why the ICE occurs.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89705
--- Comment #4 from Marek Polacek ---
Same with int:
struct W { operator const int(); };
int&& i = W();
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85860
--- Comment #7 from Vladimir Makarov ---
Author: vmakarov
Date: Wed Mar 13 20:44:50 2019
New Revision: 269663
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269663&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2019-03-13 Vladimir Makarov
PR target/85860
* lr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79651
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85860
--- Comment #6 from Vladimir Makarov ---
Author: vmakarov
Date: Wed Mar 13 20:35:18 2019
New Revision: 269662
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269662&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2019-03-13 Vladimir Makarov
PR target/85860
* lr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89708
Bug ID: 89708
Summary: printf and std::byte
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89498
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Mar 13 20:22:15 2019
New Revision: 269661
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269661&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR debug/89498
* dwarf2out.c (size_of_die): For dw_val_cla
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89707
Bug ID: 89707
Summary: [F03] PDT with procedure pointer component
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89660
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||rejects-valid
Status|ASSIGNE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89660
--- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek ---
Author: mpolacek
Date: Wed Mar 13 20:04:33 2019
New Revision: 269660
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269660&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/89660 - bogus error with -Wredundant-move.
* typ
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89686
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24943
--- Comment #11 from dave.anglin at bell dot net ---
On 2019-03-13 4:09 a.m., rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> So it's a target issue, not a debug one. Of course we could avoid generating
> wrong-debug by generating none whenever the argument
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89686
--- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek ---
Author: mpolacek
Date: Wed Mar 13 19:58:20 2019
New Revision: 269659
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269659&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/89686 - mixing init-capture and simple-capture in lambda
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89696
--- Comment #11 from Khang H. Nguyen ---
That is cool with me if you think it that way.
But I don't think you would be very happy parsing " 123 4" and still get the
same result as "1234". Or if you were to give it a blank string and get 0 where
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89706
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89601
--- Comment #5 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: janus
Date: Wed Mar 13 19:52:23 2019
New Revision: 269658
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269658&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
fix PR 89601
2019-03-13 Janus Weil
PR fortran/89601
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89696
--- Comment #10 from Steve Kargl ---
On Wed, Mar 13, 2019 at 07:36:10PM +, kevin at fai dot host wrote:
>
> --- Comment #9 from Khang H. Nguyen ---
> No, no, you got me wrong, it is not a tutorial. You got it wrong.
> I just see so much ins
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89696
--- Comment #9 from Khang H. Nguyen ---
No, no, you got me wrong, it is not a tutorial. You got it wrong. I just see so
much insecure with the statement read, of which I think it more like a
procedure. That is why I am trying to report the bug.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89696
--- Comment #8 from Steve Kargl ---
On Wed, Mar 13, 2019 at 07:17:42PM +, kevin at fai dot host wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89696
>
> --- Comment #6 from Khang H. Nguyen ---
> Sorry, if I am wasting your time.
bug
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89705
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Started to be rejected in r209521 with:
error: invalid initialization of reference of type ‘E&&’ from expression of
type ‘S’
(before accepted).
Started to ICE with r210436.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89696
--- Comment #7 from Steve Kargl ---
On Wed, Mar 13, 2019 at 07:09:19PM +, kevin at fai dot host wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89696
>
> --- Comment #5 from Khang H. Nguyen ---
> > program foo
> > integer i
> > re
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89696
--- Comment #6 from Khang H. Nguyen ---
Sorry, if I am wasting your time.
I just have an addition to add to the above.
If you use formatting. For example, in a case like this below, it will not give
a correct value, as now leading spaces will b
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89696
--- Comment #5 from Khang H. Nguyen ---
> program foo
> integer i
> read(*,*) i
> read(*,'(I4)') i
> end program foo
>
> % gfcx -o z a.f90
> % ./z
> % ./z
> 12 b
> 12 b
> At line 4 of file a.f90 (unit = 5, file = 'stdin')
> Fortran runtime
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89703
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89706
Bug ID: 89706
Summary: -Wstringop-truncation strncpy message is confusing and
has psuedo-false-positives
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85656
--- Comment #12 from John David Anglin ---
Created attachment 45962
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=45962&action=edit
Tree dump
For
FAIL: gcc.dg/ipa/ipa-icf-38.c scan-ltrans-tree-dump-not optimized "Function
bar"
on hppa64-h
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69807
--- Comment #2 from John David Anglin ---
Created attachment 45961
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=45961&action=edit
.graphite file
gcc-9.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88979
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88979
--- Comment #5 from Marek Polacek ---
Author: mpolacek
Date: Wed Mar 13 18:38:45 2019
New Revision: 269656
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269656&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/88979 - further P0634 fix for constructors.
* pa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89696
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
--- C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48957
--- Comment #4 from joseph at codesourcery dot com ---
Well, I suppose you could have a new option to say what set of fixed
headers to use, in the case where your sysroot is not based on the one
used when building GCC.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89700
Igor Klevanets changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||cerevra at yandex dot ru
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42689
Joseph S. Myers changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Resolution|FIXED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40883
Bug 40883 depends on bug 42689, which changed state.
Bug 42689 Summary: bad formatting of specs diagnostics
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42689
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89705
--- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek ---
Started with r210436.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89705
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89667
--- Comment #2 from joseph at codesourcery dot com ---
Or if for some reason you need an array of pointers to writable strings,
you can use e.g. (char []) { "foo" }, a compound literal, as the
initializer for such a pointer, instead of a simple
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89703
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89696
--- Comment #3 from Khang H. Nguyen ---
Sorry, I just have one more quick question.
Bug 1:
Nonetheless, for read(), I was just wondering, if you read from a list input
then it should be like that.
However, if it is just a raw string and it act
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89573
--- Comment #4 from joseph at codesourcery dot com ---
On Mon, 11 Mar 2019, rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> > I wouldn't expect such a cast to be generated on the result of the
> > multiplication; I'd expect long double to be converted dire
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89696
--- Comment #2 from Khang H. Nguyen ---
okay, thank you for the information, I did not know that.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89702
--- Comment #3 from Karl Burgess ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #2)
> >Solaris SunOS 5.10
>
> This might mean it is a kernel issue too.
> What does gdb show when it crashes?
> info registers
Program terminated with signal 11, Segme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89705
Bug ID: 89705
Summary: ICE in convert_like_real, at cp/call.c:7334
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89704
Bug ID: 89704
Summary: [7/8/9 Regression] ICE in add_const_value_attribute,
at dwarf2out.c:19685
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89703
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|c |tree-optimization
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89703
Bug ID: 89703
Summary: [9 Regression] ICE in compare_values_warnv, at
tree-vrp.c:997
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89662
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89662
--- Comment #3 from Martin Sebor ---
Author: msebor
Date: Wed Mar 13 17:19:43 2019
New Revision: 269655
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269655&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/89662 - -Warray-bounds ICE on void* arithmetic
gcc/C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89690
--- Comment #2 from Martin Sebor ---
Shouldn't the GIMPLE front-end give a better error message for invalid input?
I realize -fgimple is an experimental feature but it seems that we should at
least aim for the same robust error handling in the f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89702
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
>Solaris SunOS 5.10
This might mean it is a kernel issue too.
What does gdb show when it crashes?
info registers
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89699
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Blocks|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88443
Bug 88443 depends on bug 89699, which changed state.
Bug 89699 Summary: [8/9 Regression] false warning -Wstringop-overflow and memcmp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89699
What|Removed |Added
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89512
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Slightly cleaned up testcase:
struct A {
template
static const int a = 0;
};
struct B {
template
static int foo ()
{
return T::a;
}
};
int bar ()
{
return B::foo ();
}
Outside of a templa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67398
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89672
--- Comment #4 from Damon Revoe ---
And that fact is used by the optimizer. I see. Thanks!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89700
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Antony Polukhin from comment #0)
> The rules for the warning could be following:
> Issue a warning if at least one of the class members has a move constructor,
> class has a copy constructor an
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63508
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63508
--- Comment #4 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: paolo
Date: Wed Mar 13 15:01:00 2019
New Revision: 269651
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269651&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2019-03-13 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/63508
* g++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89672
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89378
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 45960
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=45960&action=edit
gcc9-pr89378.patch
Untested (quite obvious) fix, though I don't really have a way to test this.
If you could te
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89378
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89672
--- Comment #2 from Damon Revoe ---
Oops. Ironically, I checked the man page for whether NULL was a valid
argument. It just didn't occur to me to check the source. Duh.
Thank you for your time!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89074
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89702
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||i386-pc-solaris2.10
Status|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89692
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89702
Bug ID: 89702
Summary: 03 issue with SIGALRM causes program to SEGV on
Solaris
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priori
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89634
Bug 89634 depends on bug 89497, which changed state.
Bug 89497 Summary: [8 Regression] ICE caused by Segmentation Fault when
compiling cups 2.2.10 with LTO flags enabled
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89497
What|Remo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89497
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89677
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Wed Mar 13 14:08:07 2019
New Revision: 269650
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269650&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2019-03-14 Richard Biener
Backport from mainline
20
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89296
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Wed Mar 13 14:08:07 2019
New Revision: 269650
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269650&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2019-03-14 Richard Biener
Backport from mainline
20
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89497
--- Comment #30 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Wed Mar 13 14:08:07 2019
New Revision: 269650
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269650&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2019-03-14 Richard Biener
Backport from mainline
2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89699
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89701
Bug ID: 89701
Summary: Provide -fcf-protection=branch,return
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: other
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89693
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68138
Alexander Haase changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||unsavoryemail at gmail dot com
--- Com
1 - 100 of 147 matches
Mail list logo
