http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51921
--- Comment #14 from Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-15
08:13:29 UTC ---
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Wed Feb 15 08:13:22 2012
New Revision: 184256
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=184256
Log:
PR target/51921
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51921
--- Comment #13 from Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-15
08:13:20 UTC ---
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Wed Feb 15 08:13:09 2012
New Revision: 184255
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=184255
Log:
PR target/51921
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51921
Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51921
--- Comment #12 from Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-11
10:50:53 UTC ---
Did the revert fix any regression that was reported as a bug and has gotten
a testcase? If not, then the proper way to address this new regression is
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51921
Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ian at airs dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51921
--- Comment #10 from Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-10
23:35:15 UTC ---
Here is a C++ example (which comes from PR 52205 which I marked as a dup of
this bug):
#include signal.h
#include stdio.h
#include stdlib.h
#include
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51921
--- Comment #11 from Ian Lance Taylor ian at airs dot com 2012-02-11 00:10:13
UTC ---
Note that the C++ example must be compiled -fnon-call-exceptions.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51921
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51921
Rainer Orth ro at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
Known to
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51921
--- Comment #8 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ro at CeBiTec dot
Uni-Bielefeld.DE 2012-02-08 18:10:31 UTC ---
--- Comment #7 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-08
10:44:51 UTC ---
Please fill out known-to-work
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51921
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51921
--- Comment #3 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ro at CeBiTec dot
Uni-Bielefeld.DE 2012-02-07 16:59:32 UTC ---
--- Comment #2 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-07
15:37:54 UTC ---
Only sparc-sun-solaris2.10 is a
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51921
Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51921
--- Comment #5 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ro at CeBiTec dot
Uni-Bielefeld.DE 2012-02-07 17:29:37 UTC ---
--- Comment #4 from Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-07
17:12:26 UTC ---
I'm quite upset about this
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51921
--- Comment #6 from Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-02-07
17:54:18 UTC ---
You know perfectly well that such a proof is practically impossible:
that would mean updating a machine through every single Solaris 8/9/10
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51921
Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
16 matches
Mail list logo
