On Wed, May 09, 2012 at 01:48:59AM -0500, Thomas Dziedzic wrote: > On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 10:56 PM, Thomas Dziedzic <gos...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> It looks like this was caused by > >> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53084. > >> > > > > I will try to see if this was the problem once the next gcc snapshot > > comes out (this weekend or next week) and try to report back here. > > Just tried out the latest gcc snapshot 4.7-20120505 > This segfault still exists so it wasn't caused by gcc bug #53084. > Also, here is a fedora bug report for the same thing: > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=817196
The day before I posted that email, Debian got an updated gcc-4.7 which
cherry-picked a few fixes from upstream. With that update, I wasn't
able to reproduce the crash anymore. #53084 was the upstream bug that
looked like it was most relevant, but maybe that was only part of the
fix. If you want to dig into it, here's the full list of fixes that
were pulled into the updated package:
* Update to SVN 20120424 (r186746) from the gcc-4_7-branch.
- Fix PR libstdc++/52924, PR libstdc++/52591, PR middle-end/52894,
PR testsuite/53046, PR libstdc++/53067, PR libstdc++/53027,
PR libstdc++/52839, PR bootstrap/52840, PR libstdc++/52689,
PR libstdc++/52699, PR libstdc++/52822, PR libstdc++/52942,
PR middle-end/53084, PR middle-end/52999, PR c/53060,
PR tree-optimizations/52891, PR target/53033, PR target/53020,
PR target/52932, PR middle-end/52939, PR tree-optimization/52969,
PR c/52862, PR target/52775, PR tree-optimization/52943, PR c++/53003,
PR c++/38543, PR c++/50830, PR c++/50303, PR c++/52292, PR c++/52380,
PR c++/52465, PR c++/52824, PR c++/52906.
Cheers,
--
James
GPG Key: 4096R/331BA3DB 2011-12-05 James McCoy <james...@jamessan.com>
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
