https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40960
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://github.com/ossf/wg-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109310
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
||a/show_bug.cgi?id=44209
--- Comment #4 from Eric Gallager ---
Also, the warning involved here not having its own
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117401
--- Comment #4 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #3)
> That doesn't really matter. Anybody who used the option in GCC 13/14 got
> that deprecation message.
They might not have seen it, though, as it is easy for war
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117401
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3 from Eric Gallager ---
If this had been fixed previously, I probably wouldn't have gotten in the habit
of making my configure lines as long as I currently do!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94535
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
||2024-10-29
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0 |1
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1 from Eric Gallager ---
Confirmed that the documentation still
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77723
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101125
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93677
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80653
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37820
--- Comment #3 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to brian from comment #1)
> To list predefined macros, use -dM with an empty input file, e.g. "gcc
> -dM -E -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98021
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117263
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
||a/show_bug.cgi?id=103324
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2 from Eric Gallager ---
Related: bug 103324 for a more general smoketest
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113143
--- Comment #18 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to Sergey Fedorov from comment #17)
> (In reply to Eric Gallager from comment #15)
> > This is one of the things blocking bug 46986, isn't it?
>
> ucontext is supported on macOS, AFAIK.
Only on
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113143
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
Last reconfirmed||2024-10-16
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
--- Comment #1 from Eric Gallager ---
Hm, that's strange, the Option Summary page says that it should be under x86
Options: https://gcc.gn
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117156
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89863
Bug 89863 depends on bug 47170, which changed state.
Bug 47170 Summary: [cppcheck][PATCH] found resource leaks in
gcc/intl/localealias.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47170
What|Removed |Added
--
|--- |WONTFIX
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2 from Eric Gallager ---
GCC no longer contains this file; closing.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49564
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
||WebRTC with PCH
Resolution|--- |INVALID
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
Keywords||ice-on
||PCH
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3 from Eric Gallager ---
retitling to clarify
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87832
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92900
--- Comment #5 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to Eric Gallager from comment #1)
> possibly related to bug 60972
...and, from the other direction, bug 68160 and bug 36566
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102824
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
--- Comment #14 from Eric Gallager
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43301
--- Comment #9 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to Eric Gallager from comment #8)
> we've got an idea that I just need to test
(well, either I, or someone else, I guess...)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108310
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|egallager at gcc dot gnu.org |unassigned at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81114
--- Comment #10 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to simon from comment #9)
> Created attachment 56140 [details]
> C demonstrator
>
> As noted in comment 8, the C compiler doesn’t have a problem with
> finding a file with a combining filename wh
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117059
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77502
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111396
--- Comment #6 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to Antoni from comment #5)
> I believe so, but there might always be cases that we need to fix.
> Why do you ask? Did you get any issue?
I was just wondering if I could close it.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111396
--- Comment #4 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to GCC Commits from comment #3)
> The master branch has been updated by David Malcolm :
>
> https://gcc.gnu.org/g:8415bceea9d3ca86adc00ae8ad92deaec0457dd1
>
> commit r14-7117-g8415bceea9d3ca86adc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117028
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116951
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
||87403
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1 from Eric Gallager ---
I'd be careful to check how this interacts with the other switch-related
warnings; sometimes I've added a default case like that just to silenc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112297
--- Comment #6 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to GCC Commits from comment #5)
> The releases/gcc-12 branch has been updated by Iain D Sandoe
> :
>
> https://gcc.gnu.org/g:0eb6f8874047f7e7f13027aaac14d3de276c5e69
>
> commit r12-10370-g0eb6f88
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116792
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116613
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116794
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2024-09-21
Assignee|unassigne
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116774
--- Comment #5 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to Sam James from comment #3)
> The problem is that it's riscv (so 11 is prehistoric in that context) and
> it's also a huge generated file.
>
> tbh, I suspect if you re-run the failing command, i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116774
--- Comment #2 from Eric Gallager ---
well, I mean, it *ought* to be possible to bootstrap with GCC 11 as the host
compiler, right? The "transition to C++14" thread on the mailing lists was just
talking about raising the requirement for the host
Priority: P3
Component: target
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Host: riscv64-unknown-linux-gnu
Target: riscv64-unknown-linux-gnu
Build: riscv64-unknown-linux-gnu
No
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44032
--- Comment #12 from Eric Gallager ---
I'm hearing this came up at Cauldron this year... I wasn't there, so could
somebody who was summarize in this bug report for us?
||a/show_bug.cgi?id=37210
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #38 from Eric Gallager ---
Related: bug 37210 (in that they're both about cases where the build system
should warn the user about trying to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116744
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96842
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
URL||https://gcc.gnu.org/piperma
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116642
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54140
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
||patch
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2 from Eric Gallager ---
Jason has a patch:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2024-September/662214.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81665
--- Comment #7 from Eric Gallager ---
This patch for bug 46457 looks kind of related:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2024-September/662214.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83324
--- Comment #34 from Eric Gallager ---
Yeah I think GCC should support the __attribute__ style syntax for this
attribute, too
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110522
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116021
--- Comment #11 from Eric Gallager ---
Update: I finally managed to bootstrap using one of Simon Wright's releases:
https://github.com/simonjwright/distributing-gcc/releases
I still think there might be a bug in the build system somewhere leadin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116481
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80060
--- Comment #2 from Eric Gallager ---
Another example: off_t is sometimes defined as long long, and sometimes as just
long, but in each case sizeof(off_t) == 8, so it shouldn't really matter
whether you use "ll" or just "l" as the modifier for it
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116438
--- Comment #4 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to Eric Botcazou from comment #3)
> In my experience a backtrace is not sufficient to debug compiler issues.
It might not be sufficient on its own, but it'd at least be an improvement
||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
Last reconfirmed||2024-08-21
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #1 from Eric Gallager ---
Confirmed.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109565
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111654
--- Comment #8 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to Julian Waters from comment #7)
> I recently stumbled upon -Wno-attributes, which can apparently take a
> parameter like -Wno-attributes=vendor:: and I think that's appropriate for
> this particu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116252
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88002
--- Comment #2 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to Ian Lance Taylor from comment #1)
> I really have no intention of running the libbacktrace tests under DejaGNU.
> But if someone wants to copy the .sum file generation out of libgo (which
> also
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115212
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
Resolution|--- |FIXED
--- Comment #8 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to anlauf from comment #7)
> (In reply to nightstrike from comment #6)
> > This fails on x86_64-w64-mingw32 as well.
>
> Can you
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102735
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94466
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1 from Eric Gallager ---
since this is from the fortran testsuite specifically, I wonder how this
relates to the project for moving fortran diagnostics to use the common
diagnostics machinery? (I can't seem to the bug number for
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90481
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71931
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
,
||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
Keywords||diagnostic
--- Comment #3 from Eric Gallager ---
Diagnostic output formatting has changed a lot since this was filed; I wonder
if it's still relevant?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56017
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53028
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116087
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116021
--- Comment #9 from Eric Gallager ---
Ah, looking at gcc/ada/gcc-interface/Makefile.in, perhaps the issue is that I
need to set GNATLINK in my environment, too, besides just GNATMAKE and
GNATBIND... perhaps the issue was arising due to having ha
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116021
--- Comment #7 from Eric Gallager ---
Well ok, could someone send me a binary x86_64 build of GCC for darwin20 with
Ada support that they can bootstrap with successfully, then, so that I can get
back to bootstrapping, too? Either that, or send m
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96635
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116021
--- Comment #4 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to Andreas Schwab from comment #3)
> You need to use an older Ada compiler (13 or older) for bootstrapping, not
> any of the broken intermediate versions between Aug 2023 and Jan 2024.
I wonder if
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96635
--- Comment #5 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to Mark Harmstone from comment #4)
> (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #2)
> > The patches to support CodeView is being added (and improved) for GCC 15. I
> > am not sure how much will be fini
Keywords: build
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
CC: iains at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
I was trying to figure this out with
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96635
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mark at harmstone dot com
--- Comment #3
Priority: P3
Component: c
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Sometimes a header outside of my control will do #pragma GCC poison on an
identifier that I disagree about its deservingness for poisoning. Say
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96635
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=6906
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85563
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47229
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68524
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115885
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115880
--- Comment #3 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to Iain Sandoe from comment #2)
> I have posted patches (which need an update [on my shorter TODO] that
> implement the availability attribute). That makes a fix unnecessary - I
> would much rathe
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115880
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||10.4.0, 11.4.0, 12.3.0,
Priority: P3
Component: target
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
CC: iains at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Target: x86_64-apple-darwin
Testcase:
$ cat cf_include.c
#include
$
My
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115735
--- Comment #12 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to David Malcolm from comment #9)
> Note that the POSIX list might not be redistributable, and the stuff in
> glibc is probably under the GFDL rather than the GPL. Using glibc's is
> probably the
||a/show_bug.cgi?id=15338
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #5 from Eric Gallager ---
See also bug 15338 for another issue with the compiler failing to know enough
about syslog()
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115684
--- Comment #5 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #4)
> C++ has -Wzero-as-null-pointer-constant .
> Maybe it should be added for C also for at least C23 where nullptr exists
> now.
>
> Note for C++, the enum value is
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115684
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78352
--- Comment #31 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to Sergey Fedorov from comment #29)
> (In reply to Eric Gallager from comment #25)
> > Cross-referencing against
> > https://github.com/apple/swift-corelibs-libdispatch/issues/765
>
> By the way,
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P3
Component: analyzer
Assignee: dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
I brought this up on IRC previously, but since I can't remember when, I'll
rewrite it the best
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48839
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||valsiterb at gmail dot com
--- Comment #
|--- |DUPLICATE
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to valsiterb from comment #0)
> I was working on a 20 years old codebase and in order to increase
> compilation speed, I've converted
1 - 100 of 1266 matches
Mail list logo
