|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |LpSolit at netscape dot
net
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84167
Frédéric Buclin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
|--- |FIXED
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |LpSolit at netscape dot
net
--- Comment #1 from Frédéric Buclin ---
Done.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45778
Frédéric Buclin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33364
Frédéric Buclin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36739
Frédéric Buclin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79468
Frédéric Buclin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81963
Bug ID: 81963
Summary: ICE in stage 2 compiler while configuring libgcc in
stage2, during GIMPLE pass: cfg
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81292
--- Comment #10 from Dmitry G. Dyachenko ---
r249961 PASS for me
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81710
Petr Ovtchenkov changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #41921|0 |1
is patch|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81891
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80772
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80519
--- Comment #7 from Richard Biener ---
*** Bug 81892 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81292
--- Comment #10 from Dmitry G. Dyachenko ---
r249961 PASS for me
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80772
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81710
Petr Ovtchenkov changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #41921|0 |1
is patch|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81839
--- Comment #2 from Frédéric Buclin ---
*** Bug 81838 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81838
Bug ID: 81838
Summary: [7/8 Regression] doduc.f90 undefined behavior warning
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: RESOLVED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58796
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|6.2 |6.3
Known to fail|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68749
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|6.2 |6.3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49857
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|6.2 |6.3
Known to fail|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71629
Arseny Solokha changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED
Resolution|FIXED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66487
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|6.2 |6.3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39589
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|6.2 |6.3
Known to fail|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65642
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|6.2 |6.3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70019
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|6.2 |6.3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35514
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|6.2 |6.3
Known to fail|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28628
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|6.2 |6.3
Known to fail|
|--- |FIXED
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |LpSolit at netscape dot
net
Summary|Please disable the |Disable the priority and
|"Importance:" field for |severity fields for users
|norma
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77319
Frédéric Buclin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||overseers at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77319
--- Comment #1 from Frédéric Buclin ---
Is this behavior new? Because the Bugzilla code and configuration didn't change
since Aug 17.
I suspect that the anti-spam filters on the mail server are the culprit. fche
said they could take several tens
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72856
--- Comment #10 from Frédéric Buclin ---
(In reply to Frank Ch. Eigler from comment #6)
> Per-account rate limits seem so easy to overcome, with spammers already
> creating numerous verified junk accounts with ease.
I banned several ranges of IP
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71042
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71042
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67410
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[5/6/7 Regression] |[5 Regression] c/c-typeck.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50406
Vittorio Zecca changed:
What|Removed |Added
Version|4.8.0 |7.0
--- Comment #4 from Vittorio Zecca
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72856
--- Comment #5 from Frédéric Buclin ---
(In reply to Gerald Pfeifer from comment #2)
> As for rate throttling, how about only allowing for a single bug
> report per day until a bug report has been "processed"
Isn't one bug per day a bit rude fo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72856
--- Comment #4 from Frédéric Buclin ---
(In reply to Manuel López-Ibáñez from comment #3)
> I wonder about the effort required to do such a thing. Some of those emails
> seem fake, is there some kind of confirmation email for newly created
> acco
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72856
Frédéric Buclin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70835
Bug ID: 70835
Summary: internal compiler error on libiberty/floatformat.c
when bootstrapping 5.3.0 with 5.3.0
Product: gcc
Version: 5.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Se
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64968
--- Comment #49 from Frédéric Buclin ---
(In reply to Markus Trippelsdorf from comment #47)
> Another cosmetic issue that I've noticed is that an extra newline is added
> after every quoted comment.
This problem has been reported upstream, see
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67239
Bug ID: 67239
Summary: [6 Regression] FAIL:
23_containers/unordered_set/insert/hash_policy.cc
execution test
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFI
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67215
--- Comment #6 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #5)
> Created attachment 36190 [details]
> A patch
>
> For x86, -fno-plt should be handled by ix86_expand_call to
> generate indirect call via GOT, not by forcing the function
> a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41387
Francois-Xavier Coudert changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64968
--- Comment #45 from Frédéric Buclin ---
(In reply to Markus Trippelsdorf from comment #44)
> Any update on the timestamp issue? It still happens regularly.
I reported to overseers that the problem was not in Bugzilla, per comment 34,
but I don'
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64968
Frédéric Buclin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #35409|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64968
--- Comment #42 from Frédéric Buclin ---
(In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #41)
> The GCC bugzilla favicon now shows generic Bugzilla favicon. Previously, it
> was a GCC favicon.
Fixed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64968
--- Comment #39 from Frédéric Buclin ---
Bug fixed upstream, and here. :)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64968
--- Comment #38 from Frédéric Buclin ---
I can confirm the regression. I reported this issue upstream:
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1162914
Thanks Markus for catching that! :)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64968
--- Comment #34 from Frédéric Buclin ---
My debug code caught the problem. In one of the last bugmails, I got:
Date: Sun, 03 May 2015 14:56:33 +
X-Bugzilla-Debug-Date: Sun, 03 May 2015 14:56:33 +
X-Bugzilla-Debug-DeltaTS: 2015-05-03 20:2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64968
--- Comment #33 from Frédéric Buclin ---
I found only one user account which uses the Asia/Kolkata timezone. But no
reason why this would interact with the local timezone.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64968
--- Comment #32 from Frédéric Buclin ---
For some reason, DateTime::TimeZone->new(name => 'local') sometimes returns
Asia/Kolkata, which explains the -05:30 offset observed in the famous 2% of
bugmails with an incorrect timestamp. I added extra d
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64968
--- Comment #31 from Frédéric Buclin ---
(ignore this one as well)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64968
--- Comment #30 from Frédéric Buclin ---
(I added some debug code to Bugzilla to try to understand what's wrong. Just
ignore this email.)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64968
--- Comment #29 from Frédéric Buclin ---
One more, at :45:
Matt Breedlove 2015-04-30 20:45:32 UTC
I now have no doubt that this is not a coincidence.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64968
--- Comment #28 from Frédéric Buclin ---
Maybe is this a coincidence, but all bugmails I found which have a wrong
timestamp have something in common. First of all, the offset is *always* the
same: -05:30. Then, it seems the problem only happens w
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64968
--- Comment #25 from Frédéric Buclin ---
Did this problem disappear? Or are there still some bugmails today with a wrong
timestamp?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64968
--- Comment #23 from Frédéric Buclin ---
(In reply to Markus Trippelsdorf from comment #22)
> No. But the question makes no sense, because we're talking about mails that
> bugzilla automatically sends to the bug mailing lists on every new comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64968
--- Comment #21 from Frédéric Buclin ---
Markus, did you change your timezone preference between comments 18 and 19? If
yes, which ones did you select?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64968
--- Comment #17 from Frédéric Buclin ---
Patch applied. Mikael, the next time you upload a f90 script, Bugzilla will
correctly detect it as text/plain. Note that it won't convert the MIME type of
already uploaded attachments (which you can manual
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64968
Frédéric Buclin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #35353|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64968
--- Comment #14 from Frédéric Buclin ---
(In reply to Mikael Morin from comment #12)
> Hello, not sure this is due to the upgrade, but the attachment
> appears empty in the page:
That's unrelated to the upgrade. Your web browser is unable to dis
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64968
Frédéric Buclin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64968
Frédéric Buclin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #35354|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64968
--- Comment #9 from Frédéric Buclin ---
Created attachment 35354
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35354&action=edit
GCC extension for 5.0, v2
And the corresponding new extension.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64968
Frédéric Buclin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #34735|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65103
--- Comment #1 from Ilya Enkovich ---
Author: ienkovich
Date: Thu Mar 12 09:53:36 2015
New Revision: 221380
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=221380&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
gcc/
PR target/65103
* config/i386/i386.c (ix86_address_cost)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64968
--- Comment #7 from Frédéric Buclin ---
Created attachment 34736
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=34736&action=edit
GCC extension for 5.0, v1
This is exactly the same GCC extension as for 4.4.5. So far, it seems to work
fine
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64968
--- Comment #6 from Frédéric Buclin ---
Created attachment 34735
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=34735&action=edit
GCC patch for 5.0, v1
No code changes compared to 4.4, but the patch for 4.4 didn't apply cleanly to
5.0 due
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64968
--- Comment #4 from Frédéric Buclin ---
Bugzilla 5.0 is not available from bzr, it requires git. But there is already a
.git repository in the root bugzilla/ directory, which requires root
permissions to be read. What is git used for currently?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64968
Frédéric Buclin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
Assignee: LpSolit at netscape dot net
Reporter: LpSolit at netscape dot net
Bugzilla 5.0 reached Release Candidate stage, and should now be stable enough
to be used in production. Unless someone has strong objections, I plan to
upgrade both GCC Bugzilla and Sourceware Bugzilla to 5.0rc2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11911
--- Comment #9 from Frédéric Buclin ---
(In reply to anthony from comment #4)
> That was I. Any way to change the reporter to acq...@optonline.net?
Done (12 years later)!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64804
Bug ID: 64804
Summary: Specific use of __attribute ((always_inline)) breaks
MPX functionality with -fcheck-pointer-bounds -mmpx
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCO
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64807
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62173
--- Comment #29 from Jiong Wang ---
(In reply to amker from comment #20)
> (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #18)
> > It's probably not correct to simply transfer range info from *idx to
> > iv->base.
> > Instead SCEV analysis needs to tra
|--- |FIXED
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |LpSolit at netscape dot
net
--- Comment #5 from Frédéric Buclin ---
Description for the 6 custom fields added.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62667
Frédéric Buclin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Version|0.98
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62665
Frédéric Buclin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Component|bootstrap
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62339
Frédéric Buclin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62339
Frédéric Buclin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|CLOSED |UNCONFIRMED
Resolution|INVALID
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62523
Frédéric Buclin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Component|classpath
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62521
Frédéric Buclin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Component|bootstrap
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61845
Bug ID: 61845
Summary: Minor build warnings for gcc-4.9.1
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libgcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61794
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61840
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59432
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|i386-pc-solaris2.* |x86
Status|UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45911
Frédéric Buclin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56063
Frédéric Buclin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56063
Frédéric Buclin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|2013-01-21
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52239
--- Comment #21 from Frédéric Buclin ---
(In reply to Tobias Burnus from comment #20)
> Since the update, the Bugzilla favicon is shown,
> before the GCC one was shown:
Fixed.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55237
--- Comment #14 from Frédéric Buclin ---
On the other hand, you are free to not click on a register name which is
linkified.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55237
--- Comment #11 from Frédéric Buclin ---
What's the max value of a register name? r31?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52239
--- Comment #19 from Frédéric Buclin ---
(In reply to Marc Glisse from comment #17)
> the "Keywords" field auto-completes when editing an existing bug, but not in
> the form to create a new bug. I seem to remember that it used to work...
Fixed!
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52239
--- Comment #18 from Frédéric Buclin ---
(In reply to Marc Glisse from comment #17)
> the "Keywords" field auto-completes when editing an existing bug, but not in
> the form to create a new bug. I seem to remember that it used to work...
That's w
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52239
Frédéric Buclin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #30072|0 |1
is obsolete|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55237
Frédéric Buclin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52239
Frédéric Buclin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #30071|0 |1
is obsolete|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52239
Frédéric Buclin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #30066|0 |1
is obsolete|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52239
--- Comment #12 from Frédéric Buclin 2013-05-09
00:20:01 UTC ---
Note that I didn't include the fix from
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=571533 yet as I first want to make
sure that this fix is still needed after the upgrade.
I will
1 - 100 of 275 matches
Mail list logo
