subject:"\[Bug libfortran\/78055\] \[7 regression\] Many new gfortran test failures"

[Bug libfortran/78055] [7 regression] Many new gfortran test failures

2016-10-24 Thread dje at gcc dot gnu.org

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78055 --- Comment #15 from David Edelsohn --- The AIX failures are fixed.

[Bug libfortran/78055] [7 regression] Many new gfortran test failures

2016-10-24 Thread ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78055 --- Comment #14 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE --- > --- Comment #12 from Jerry DeLisle --- > Rainer, please confirm the fix commited on trunk when you have time. Sure: I had it in my tree during this weekend's bootstraps and all

[Bug libfortran/78055] [7 regression] Many new gfortran test failures

2016-10-21 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78055 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED CC|

[Bug libfortran/78055] [7 regression] Many new gfortran test failures

2016-10-21 Thread jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78055 --- Comment #12 from Jerry DeLisle --- Rainer, please confirm the fix commited on trunk when you have time.

[Bug libfortran/78055] [7 regression] Many new gfortran test failures

2016-10-21 Thread jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78055 --- Comment #11 from Jerry DeLisle --- Author: jvdelisle Date: Fri Oct 21 18:02:32 2016 New Revision: 241422 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=241422=gcc=rev Log: 2016-10-21 Jerry DeLisle PR

[Bug libfortran/78055] [7 regression] Many new gfortran test failures

2016-10-21 Thread jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78055 Jerry DeLisle changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned

[Bug libfortran/78055] [7 regression] Many new gfortran test failures

2016-10-20 Thread dje at gcc dot gnu.org

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78055 David Edelsohn changed: What|Removed |Added Target|sparc-sun-solaris2.12 |sparc-sun-solaris2.12,

[Bug libfortran/78055] [7 regression] Many new gfortran test failures

2016-10-20 Thread ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78055 --- Comment #8 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE --- > --- Comment #7 from Jerry DeLisle --- > Would you please apply the patch from here and see if it fixes also or breaks > more. > > https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2016-10/msg00133.html

[Bug libfortran/78055] [7 regression] Many new gfortran test failures

2016-10-20 Thread jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78055 --- Comment #7 from Jerry DeLisle --- Rainer, Would you please apply the patch from here and see if it fixes also or breaks more. https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2016-10/msg00133.html Thanks, Jerry

[Bug libfortran/78055] [7 regression] Many new gfortran test failures

2016-10-20 Thread jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78055 --- Comment #6 from Jerry DeLisle --- I think I understand. The Frontend needs to access the parameters before and after the dtp->u.p section. When deleting that integer, that section was shortened, so the placement of the parameters after are

[Bug libfortran/78055] [7 regression] Many new gfortran test failures

2016-10-20 Thread jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78055 --- Comment #5 from Jerry DeLisle --- Ok I will commit that little chink for now. My next patch really slams this structure so I think I will send it to you first to see what breaks. In fact I just pinged the post for it. In the meantime need

[Bug libfortran/78055] [7 regression] Many new gfortran test failures

2016-10-20 Thread ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78055 --- Comment #4 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE --- > --- Comment #3 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE Uni-Bielefeld.DE> --- [...] > Seems so, especially since sparc is more sensitive here. I've just > rebuilt libgfortran with the

[Bug libfortran/78055] [7 regression] Many new gfortran test failures

2016-10-20 Thread ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78055 --- Comment #3 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE --- > --- Comment #2 from Jerry DeLisle --- > As a test, try this patch. > > diff --git a/libgfortran/io/io.h b/libgfortran/io/io.h > index edc520a9..00ced533 100644 > ---

[Bug libfortran/78055] [7 regression] Many new gfortran test failures

2016-10-20 Thread jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78055 --- Comment #2 from Jerry DeLisle --- As a test, try this patch. diff --git a/libgfortran/io/io.h b/libgfortran/io/io.h index edc520a9..00ced533 100644 --- a/libgfortran/io/io.h +++ b/libgfortran/io/io.h @@ -514,6 +514,7 @@ typedef struct