https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94628
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Summary|segf
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94629
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94631
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Rich Felker from comment #2)
> So basically the outcome of DR120 was allowing the GCC behavior? It still
> seems like a bad thing, not required, and likely to produce exploitable bugs
> (due to t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94630
--- Comment #3 from Michael Meissner ---
Created attachment 48297
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=48297&action=edit
Patch to mangle *printf and *scanf built-ins if long double is IEEE-128
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94631
--- Comment #2 from Rich Felker ---
So basically the outcome of DR120 was allowing the GCC behavior? It still seems
like a bad thing, not required, and likely to produce exploitable bugs (due to
truncation of arithmetic) as well as very poor-perf
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94631
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94631
Bug ID: 94631
Summary: Wrong codegen for arithmetic on bitfields
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93974
Peter Bergner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93974
--- Comment #24 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Peter Bergner :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:dd75498db79675a1a0b73c25e5f110969ee72d9d
commit r10-7764-gdd75498db79675a1a0b73c25e5f110969ee72d9d
Author: Peter Bergner
Date: T
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94630
--- Comment #2 from Michael Meissner ---
When the default is changed, we will need to map __builtin_sprintf and company
just like GLIBC will do it if the user includes stdio.h.
Otherwise the gcc.dg/tree-ssa/builtin-sprintf.c test fails because i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94630
--- Comment #1 from Michael Meissner ---
Created attachment 48296
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=48296&action=edit
Patch do the correct mapping for builtin math functions right when long double
default is IEEE.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94630
Michael Meissner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |meissner at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94630
Bug ID: 94630
Summary: General bug for changes needed to switch the PowerPC
long double default
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92187
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94586
--- Comment #24 from Steve Kargl ---
On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 09:32:46PM +, dave.anglin at bell dot net wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94586
>
> --- Comment #23 from dave.anglin at bell dot net ---
> On 2020-04-16 5:07
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92326
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|REOPENED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94359
--- Comment #17 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Iain D Sandoe :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:d0ce5baeb642bab57252c687cdf0ffb522e7a2a3
commit r10-7762-gd0ce5baeb642bab57252c687cdf0ffb522e7a2a3
Author: Iain Sandoe
Date: Thu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94629
Bug ID: 94629
Summary: 10 issues located by the PVS-studio static analyzer
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94567
--- Comment #15 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
Comment on attachment 48288
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=48288
gcc10-pr94567.patch
I think that'll work. If it passes, consider it approved.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94628
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94628
Bug ID: 94628
Summary: segfault decltype
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unass
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94586
--- Comment #23 from dave.anglin at bell dot net ---
On 2020-04-16 5:07 p.m., sgk at troutmask dot apl.washington.edu wrote:
> It is unclear to me if the patch will meet everyone's
> expectation. In particular, there are currently no
> target-sp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92008
Jim Wilson changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||wilson at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #21 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94613
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|s390x |s390x powerpc*-*-*
Last reconfirm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94586
--- Comment #22 from Steve Kargl ---
On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 08:06:00PM +, danglin at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94586
>
> --- Comment #21 from John David Anglin ---
> Created attachment 48295
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94627
Bug ID: 94627
Summary: [9/10 Regression] std::match_results equality
comparisons should not be noexcept
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94627
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||8.4.0
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88754
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94426
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Iain D Sandoe :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:b084efe3fcdfcf88e1703800b9b99347e89beefb
commit r10-7761-gb084efe3fcdfcf88e1703800b9b99347e89beefb
Author: Iain Sandoe
Date: Thu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91630
--- Comment #1 from Daniel Krügler ---
This looks like a variant fo bug 90415 to me.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94626
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94586
--- Comment #21 from John David Anglin ---
Created attachment 48295
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=48295&action=edit
Patch to fix float128 node selection on hpux
With this change, the libquadmath routines are now selected o
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94538
--- Comment #15 from Christophe Lyon ---
(In reply to Wilco from comment #14)
> (In reply to Christophe Lyon from comment #11)
> > (In reply to Wilco from comment #10)
>
> > Right, but the code is functional.
>
> It doesn't avoid the literal lo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14441
Rich Felker changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bugdal at aerifal dot cx
--- Comment #11 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93932
Michael Meissner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94615
Allison Karlitskaya changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94626
Bug ID: 94626
Summary: -Wstringop-truncation warning should mention
attribute((nonstring))
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94615
Allison Karlitskaya changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=6906
felix changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||felix.von.s at posteo dot de
--- Comment #9 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94615
--- Comment #3 from Allison Karlitskaya
---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1)
> Maybe use memcpy then, str* routines generally expect nul-termination
"str* routines generally expect nul-termination" doesn't really fly as an
argument,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94611
--- Comment #10 from Ian Lance Taylor ---
Thanks. This may be another example of https://gcc.gnu.org/PR94466.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94625
Bug ID: 94625
Summary: documentation of _gfortran_set_options does not match
implementation
Product: gcc
Version: 9.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94624
Bug ID: 94624
Summary: Nested lambda mutable capture of outer lambda
non-mutable capture is not allowed
Product: gcc
Version: tree-ssa
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Sever
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93621
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93621
--- Comment #19 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Martin Jambor :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:7123347c8b44571811c4b58506b06fb09969bccb
commit r10-7760-g7123347c8b44571811c4b58506b06fb09969bccb
Author: Martin Jambor
Date: T
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94611
--- Comment #9 from Daniel Kolesa ---
it finishes with -fno-var-tracking, though it does take up a few gigs of memory
and takes a while, this is consistent with the default behavior on x86_64 where
it does the same thing.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94538
--- Comment #14 from Wilco ---
(In reply to Christophe Lyon from comment #11)
> (In reply to Wilco from comment #10)
> Right, but the code is functional.
It doesn't avoid the literal load from flash which is exactly what pure-code
and slow-flas
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94483
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|error-recovery, |ice-on-valid-code
|ice
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94557
Michael Meissner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93932
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-9 branch has been updated by Michael Meissner
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:baf3a5a94244b4a260810825870be6ecc15fa35a
commit r9-8504-gbaf3a5a94244b4a260810825870be6ecc15fa35a
Author: Michael Meissne
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94557
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-9 branch has been updated by Michael Meissner
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:baf3a5a94244b4a260810825870be6ecc15fa35a
commit r9-8504-gbaf3a5a94244b4a260810825870be6ecc15fa35a
Author: Michael Meissne
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94611
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ian at airs dot com
--- Comment #8 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94623
Bug ID: 94623
Summary: ice for ./gdc.test/compilable/interpret3.d
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: d
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94538
--- Comment #13 from Wilco ---
(In reply to Christophe Lyon from comment #12)
> I've posted a patch to fix the regression for your f3() examples:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2020-April/543993.html
Yes that improves some of the ex
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94610
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94621
--- Comment #5 from Ola Olsson ---
My god. Insanely fast. Dobra robota/prace!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94621
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 48294
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=48294&action=edit
gcc10-pr94621.patch
Untested fix.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94622
acsawdey at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2020-04-16
Assign
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94619
Daniel Krügler changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||daniel.kruegler@googlemail.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94621
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |9.4
Summary|GCC 9.2.1 segfaul
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94622
Bug ID: 94622
Summary: testsuite/gcc.dg/atomic/c11-atomic-exec-1.c fails on
powerpc64le with -mpcrel
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: no
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94611
Daniel Kolesa changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||ppc64le-linux-gnu
--- Comment #7 from Da
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94538
--- Comment #12 from Christophe Lyon ---
I've posted a patch to fix the regression for your f3() examples:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2020-April/543993.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94618
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34678
--- Comment #43 from Vincent Lefèvre ---
Note that the effect of changing the rounding mode after a computation, whether
-frounding-math is used or not, is not just that the change of rounding mode
may not be honored. If can yield inconsistencies
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66519
Arseny Solokha changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||asolokha at gmx dot com
--- Comment #4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91538
Arseny Solokha changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||asolokha at gmx dot com
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94621
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
*** Bug 94620 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94620
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94620
--- Comment #1 from Ola Olsson ---
Somehow I managed to create two bugs. Sorry about this. Let's do the
conversation in the other one (94621).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94621
--- Comment #1 from Ola Olsson ---
Created attachment 48292
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=48292&action=edit
Preprocessed file of the smallest example I could make
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68394
--- Comment #2 from Arseny Solokha ---
Regardless of an answer, it is a duplicate of PR68395.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94621
Bug ID: 94621
Summary: GCC 9.2.1 segfaults when compiling file with -O3
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94620
Bug ID: 94620
Summary: GCC 9.2.1 segfaults when compiling file with -O3
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94611
--- Comment #6 from Daniel Kolesa ---
Another thing of note, the gccgo command that hangs is the same on both x86_64
and ppc64le
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94611
Daniel Kolesa changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|powerpc64le-linux-gnu |
--- Comment #5 from Daniel Kolesa ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94606
rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolutio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94606
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Sandiford :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:26bebf576ddcdcfb596f07e8c2896f17c48516e7
commit r10-7759-g26bebf576ddcdcfb596f07e8c2896f17c48516e7
Author: Richard Sandiford
Da
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94618
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
I think the difference is much earlier, in cse_local dump there is (with
additional --param=min-nondebug-insn-uid=1):
deferring deletion of insn with uid = 10060.
-deferring deletion of insn with uid = 1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94618
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vmakarov at gcc dot gnu.org
K
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94578
--- Comment #6 from Thomas Koenig ---
Also wrong:
program main
implicit none
type foo
integer :: x, y
end type foo
integer :: i
integer, dimension (2,2) :: array2d
integer, dimension(:), pointer :: array1d
type(foo), dimension
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94578
--- Comment #5 from Thomas Koenig ---
Somewhat smaller test case:
program main
implicit none
type foo
integer :: x, y
end type foo
integer :: i
integer, dimension (2,2) :: array2d
integer, dimension(:), pointer :: array1d
type
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94619
Bug ID: 94619
Summary: String literals as non-type template parameter fails
to compile with partial specialization of calling
function
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94618
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94383
--- Comment #10 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Thanks.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94383
--- Comment #9 from Matthew Malcomson ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #8)
> I'd like to ping this, it would be nice to at least decide if this should be
> handled for GCC10 or postponed to GCC11 only.
Hi Jakub -- I'm taking a look at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94611
--- Comment #4 from Daniel Kolesa ---
Oh, also, sorry, the process that *actually* gets stuck is go1, not gc1, that
was a typo.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94611
--- Comment #3 from Daniel Kolesa ---
The steps I took to reproduce the problem:
1) Grab a Go source release
2) Install gccgo including the 'go' command
3) Then do something like:
cd go-1.x
export GOROOT_BOOTSTRAP=/usr/lib/go/9.3.0
export GOROO
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94618
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||7.4.0
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94611
--- Comment #2 from Daniel Kolesa ---
It reproduces on any GCC 9.x series, and when building *any* version of the
official Go compiler (tested 1.12-1.14), and many other projects (e.g. gitea).
I'm not sure if it reproduces on x86_64, as I don't h
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94483
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
St
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94314
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94314
--- Comment #13 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Martin Liska :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:d7a65edb629a010f7ef907d457343abcb569fab7
commit r10-7758-gd7a65edb629a010f7ef907d457343abcb569fab7
Author: Martin Liska
Date: Thu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94612
--- Comment #11 from Matthias Klose ---
Created attachment 48290
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=48290&action=edit
example files
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94612
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94612
--- Comment #10 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #3)
> It's likely dup of PR94129.
Note that that one ICEs on matching compression algorithms which here
the ICE notes the compressed data stream is corrupt.
There mu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94612
--- Comment #9 from Matthias Klose ---
Both compilers have zstd support.
$ gfortran-10 -v prod.f90 -fopenmp -foffload=nvptx-none -o test.x
Driving: gfortran-10 -v prod.f90 -fopenmp -foffload=nvptx-none -o test.x -l
gfortran -l m -shared-libgcc
U
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94129
--- Comment #10 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #9)
> (In reply to Martin Liška from comment #8)
> > @Richi: Can you please enable zstd for our nvptx cross compiler:
> >
> > $ x86_64-suse-linux-accel-nvptx-none-gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94612
--- Comment #8 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to Matthias Klose from comment #6)
> $ /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-linux-gnu/10/accel/nvptx-none/mkoffload -v
> mkoffload: fatal error: COLLECT_GCC must be set.
> compilation terminated.
Then please:
$ ldd
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94612
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Matthias Klose from comment #5)
> > Perhaps Ubuntu has the offloading and non-offloading compiler configured
> > differently, one with zstd compression support and the other without?
>
> how wou
1 - 100 of 170 matches
Mail list logo