https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92773
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
Status|WAITING
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92773
--- Comment #8 from Richard Biener ---
Smaller testcase:
typedef unsigned char cfg_u8;
typedef union {
struct {
cfg_u8 offset;
cfg_u8 value;
};
struct {
cfg_u8 command;
cfg_u8 param;
};
} cfg_reg;
#define FOO { 0x00, 0x00 },
#defin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92804
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |10.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67733
rick at snowlight dot net changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rick at snowlight dot net
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92803
--- Comment #9 from Richard Biener ---
Created attachment 47425
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=47425&action=edit
my patch
testing this, the testcases optimization check likely requires some other
prerequestite from my tree.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92453
--- Comment #3 from Tim Ruehsen ---
(In reply to Christian Biesinger from comment #2)
> Could you send your patch to gcc-patches per
> https://gcc.gnu.org/contribute.html#patches ? Thanks!
I did that some days ago:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-pat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92803
--- Comment #10 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Another testcase to consider (-O2 -mavx2):
typedef double v4df __attribute__((vector_size (32)));
typedef double v2df __attribute__((vector_size (16)));
typedef short v16hi __attribute__((vector_size (32)));
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92797
--- Comment #3 from Tim Ruehsen ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #2)
> (In reply to Tim Ruehsen from comment #1)
> > BTW, llvm-cxxfilt does not show this behavior.
>
> Could it because it does not implement the D demangler?
Good poin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92781
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Dec 5 09:03:34 2019
New Revision: 278988
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=278988&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR fortran/92781
* trans-decl.c (gfc_get_symbol_decl): If
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92791
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Dec 5 09:04:24 2019
New Revision: 278989
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=278989&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/92791
* config/i386/i386.md (movstrict): Move te
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91971
--- Comment #8 from Martin Liška ---
Author: marxin
Date: Thu Dec 5 09:08:44 2019
New Revision: 278990
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=278990&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Fix profile name files without -fprofile-dir.
2019-12-05 Martin Liska
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91971
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92816
Bug ID: 92816
Summary: [10 Regression] 35% performance drop for 433.milc with
-O2 -flto on znver1 since r278879
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
S
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92803
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92816
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92816
--- Comment #1 from Martin Liška ---
-march=skylake seems unaffected:
https://lnt.opensuse.org/db_default/v4/SPEC/graph?plot.0=227.70.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92803
--- Comment #12 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Thu Dec 5 09:45:46 2019
New Revision: 278991
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=278991&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2019-12-05 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/92803
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92809
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Mil
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92055
--- Comment #12 from Georg-Johann Lay ---
Author: gjl
Date: Thu Dec 5 09:47:35 2019
New Revision: 278992
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=278992&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/92055
* config/avr/t-avrlibc (MULTISUBDIR): Se
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92815
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |8.4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92674
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||10.0
Summary|[8/9/10 Regress
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92674
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|10.0|8.4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92809
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92817
Bug ID: 92817
Summary: the prototype of the built-in __gcov_exit function is
wrong
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92809
Frederik Harwath changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||frederik at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92817
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92799
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92775
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 47426
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=47426&action=edit
gcc10-pr92775.patch
Untested fix. Unfortunately, this regresses debug info size a little bit for
the common ca
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92818
Bug ID: 92818
Summary: Typo in vec_perm -> bit_insert pattern
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92818
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92819
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
9.2.1 20191121"
+ .ident "GCC: (GNU) 10.0.0 20191205 (experimental)"
.section.note.GNU-stack,"",@progbits
None of it is shorter, only baz is the same size as before.
Referenced Bugs:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92803
[Bug 92803]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92791
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[10 Regression] ICE in |ICE in extract_insn, at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92820
Bug ID: 92820
Summary: [10 Regression] libgo.so.15 has executable stack
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: g
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92821
Bug ID: 92821
Summary: Miscompilation when passing 8-bit enum to extern
function
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92819
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92821
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92820
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92819
--- Comment #2 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1)
> Richard - when we have
>
> _7 = { _2, _2 };
> VEC_PERM
>
> then we somehow run into
>
> /* See if the permutation is performing a sing
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92819
--- Comment #3 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
---
I guess the issue is specific to 2-element vectors: { 0, 3 } can be seen as
inserting element 1 of the second vector into the first, of the first element
of the second vector into the second.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92819
--- Comment #4 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Thu, 5 Dec 2019, rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92819
>
> --- Comment #2 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
> ---
> (In reply to Richard Bien
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92819
--- Comment #5 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
---
Sorry for the dribble of messages, but how about just
changing the "else" in:
if (sel.series_p (1, 1, nelts + 1, 1))
{
/* After canonicalizing the fir
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92819
--- Comment #6 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Thu, 5 Dec 2019, rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92819
>
> --- Comment #5 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
> ---
> Sorry for the dribble of
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92817
--- Comment #2 from Martin Liška ---
>
> as it is, the builtin-in prototype does not match what one would define in
> source code and this trips up type based control-flow integrity checks.
You are right, it's wrong. Can you please explain to m
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92817
--- Comment #3 from Martin Liška ---
Author: marxin
Date: Thu Dec 5 12:35:26 2019
New Revision: 278995
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=278995&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Fix __gcov_exit fn prototype.
2019-12-05 Martin Liska
PR gcov
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92817
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92821
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hjl.tools at gmail dot com,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92820
--- Comment #1 from Andreas Schwab ---
Don't see that on aarch64 or riscv64.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92822
Bug ID: 92822
Summary: regressions on aarch64 after r278938
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimiza
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92818
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Thu Dec 5 13:02:57 2019
New Revision: 278998
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=278998&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2019-12-05 Richard Biener
PR middle-end/92818
* tre
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92823
Bug ID: 92823
Summary: Is that possible to optimize C++ exception???
I always HATE 2 phases of exception unwind
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92818
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
mp;& ./a.out
00 00 00 00 00 00 00 01 80 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
--
gcc x86-64 version: gcc (GCC) 10.0.0 20191205 (experimental)
Another variation of pr92486 and pr71475. This time on trunk and without
structs. Feel free to close as dup.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92821
--- Comment #3 from Emilio Cobos Álvarez (:emilio) ---
If my reading of https://godbolt.org/z/BNHxEY is correct (sorry, still a bit of
a noob with disassembly), it looks like GCC does correctly load only the low
byte in the equivalent implementat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92820
--- Comment #2 from Matthias Klose ---
I don't see it here on x86_64-linux-gnu, aarch64-linux-gnu,
powerpc64le-linux-gnu.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92825
Bug ID: 92825
Summary: Unnecesary stack protection and missed SLP
vectorization in Firefox's LightPixel.
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92821
Emilio Cobos Álvarez (:emilio) changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://bugs.llvm.org/sh
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92817
--- Comment #5 from PaX Team ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #2)
> You are right, it's wrong. Can you please explain to me what control-flow
> integrity check do you use?
it's my own called RAP (Reuse Attack Protector, see
https://pax
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92821
--- Comment #5 from Michael Matz ---
Yes, we (intentionally) haven't required any extensions to happen for arguments
or return values smaller than 64bit (e.g. we haven't even specified that
arguments <= 32bit would be zero-extended in the high bi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92768
--- Comment #16 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
---
Author: rsandifo
Date: Thu Dec 5 14:20:38 2019
New Revision: 279002
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=279002&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Check for bitwise identity when encoding VECTOR_CSTs (P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92825
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92821
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Note that for most types one ends up with zero or sign extension already due to
C/C++ promotion rules, though in the ABI still can't use that as guarantee, but
C++ typed enums aren't promoted.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92821
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Related links:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46942
https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=en#!topic/x86-64-abi/E8O33onbnGQ
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92826
Bug ID: 92826
Summary: Impossible to silence warning: non-standard suffix on
floating constant [-Wpedantic]
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92821
--- Comment #8 from Emilio Cobos Álvarez (:emilio) ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #6)
> Note that for most types one ends up with zero or sign extension already due
> to C/C++ promotion rules, though in the ABI still can't use that a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92827
Bug ID: 92827
Summary: Missing data/state sharing/propagation between host
and offloading devices
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: op
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92821
--- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Emilio Cobos Álvarez (:emilio) from comment #8)
> Another point that someone made in the Mozilla bug tracker is that the ABI,
> in the "Scalar Types" table, specifies that enums are represented a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92821
Emilio Cobos Álvarez (:emilio) changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92828
Bug ID: 92828
Summary: array out of bounds access in libcpp/mkdeps.c
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: b
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92829
Bug ID: 92829
Summary: [10 regression] several test case failures starting
with r278983
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92828
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||build
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92820
--- Comment #3 from Ian Lance Taylor ---
What architectures do you see it on? Do we just need to move the
.section.note.GNU-stack,"",@progbits
in runtime/go-context.S out of the #ifdef?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92746
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||asutton at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92820
--- Comment #4 from Matthias Klose ---
these are the architectures I see this:
i686-linux-gnu, s390x-linux-gnu, arm-linux-gnueabihf, arm-linux-gnueabi,
alpha-linux-gnu, powerpc-linux-gnu, sparc64-linux-gnu, sh4-linux-gnu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92828
--- Comment #2 from Andreas Krebbel ---
Created attachment 47430
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=47430&action=edit
reduced testcase
on x86_64:
cc1plus -quiet -O2 t.cc -Wall --param max-inline-insns-auto=80
t.cc: In functio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92826
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
I think this is a duplicate of an existing bug.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92826
--- Comment #2 from Marc Glisse ---
I thought the name "pedantic" made it clear that it is going to warn about
things that are just fine, and you shouldn't use it...
You can disable the warning by inserting __extension__ in your code. It might
be
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92828
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
Are you saying the warning shows up which causes the bootstrap to fail?
Because at runtime there should be no out of bounds access.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92828
--- Comment #4 from Andreas Krebbel ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #3)
> Are you saying the warning shows up which causes the bootstrap to fail?
> Because at runtime there should be no out of bounds access.
Yes. It is just the warni
;
ix = q.e.d & 5;
q.e.d = ix;
if (ix)
return g - g;
{
k = h = k * n;
i = i;
if (p)
i = l;
m = b();
o = m;
j = q.c * o;
return j;
}
}
$ /home/ubuntu/gcc/gcc-10-10-20191205/build/./gcc/xgcc
-B/home/ubuntu/gcc/gcc-10-10-20191205/build/gcc/
-B
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92796
--- Comment #2 from Matthias Klose ---
r278994
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92829
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
Target|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92826
--- Comment #3 from kim.walisch at gmail dot com ---
> I thought the name "pedantic" made it clear that it is going to warn about
> things that are just fine, and you shouldn't use it...
A large number of projects (including mine) run automated
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92829
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92820
--- Comment #5 from ian at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: ian
Date: Thu Dec 5 17:51:10 2019
New Revision: 279010
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=279010&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR go/92820
runtime: always mark assembly file as non-e
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92826
--- Comment #4 from joseph at codesourcery dot com ---
TS 18661-3 has been accepted in principle for C2x, but no-one has done the
editing work needed to get it into the (LaTeX) form needed to add as an
Annex to the C standard. Once that's in,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87488
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92820
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92830
Bug ID: 92830
Summary: -fdiagnostics-url shows the wrong URL for warnings
which are not in 'gcc' but e.g. in 'gfortran'
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92831
Bug ID: 92831
Summary: extend_ref_init_temps_1 punts on COND_EXPRs
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92831
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org
Summ
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92832
Bug ID: 92832
Summary: valgrind error in incorporate_penalties
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: bootstrap
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87488
--- Comment #14 from David Malcolm ---
Thanks.
systemd also uses '\a':
https://github.com/systemd/systemd/blob/master/src/shared/pretty-print.c#L53
n = strjoin("\x1B]8;;", url, "\a", text, "\x1B]8;;\a");
I didn't see your update to this B
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87488
--- Comment #15 from David Malcolm ---
I guess the other thing to test it on is on older gnome terminals that predate
the support - but I don't have one handy.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92833
Bug ID: 92833
Summary: ice for broken C code
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
Assignee: unassi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92831
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87488
--- Comment #16 from Egmont Koblinger ---
(In reply to Tobias Burnus from comment #13)
> but using KDE Konsole, the warnings now have:
>
>warning: control reaches end of non-void function [\-Wreturn-type\]
>
> That is: There are spurious \
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92796
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||segher at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92833
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||error-recovery,
|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92796
--- Comment #4 from Matthias Klose ---
the revision always is the one from the LAST_UPDATED file.
This was a build on Ubuntu, which has more hardening flags enabled by default.
I'll recheck with a build on Debian unstable.
1 - 100 of 143 matches
Mail list logo
