--- Additional Comments From giovannibajo at libero dot it 2005-02-27
08:45 ---
I'm not sure this matters, but the program is actually invalid, there is a
double definition of A::f.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20228
--- Additional Comments From giovannibajo at libero dot it 2005-02-27
08:49 ---
Please, always fill a different bugreport for different testcases, unless you
can prove it is exactly the same problem (and here you surely cannot). Then
add references forth and back.
--
--- Additional Comments From giovannibajo at libero dot it 2005-02-27
09:03 ---
Ah no, then it is ok. When you write:
template
FakeListIntFactory::TypePair IntFactory::_types;
you are actually *declaring* a specialization of _types. A declaration is not
a definition, so the linker
--- Additional Comments From giovannibajo at libero dot it 2005-02-27
09:11 ---
Is this a regression?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20218
--- Additional Comments From giovannibajo at libero dot it 2005-02-27
09:31 ---
Ignore my last comment. I shouldn't post before shower :)
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20228
--- Additional Comments From anton at mips dot complang dot tuwien dot ac
dot at 2005-02-27 10:47 ---
Subject: Re: [3.3/3.4/4.0 regression] pessimization of goto *
steven at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
Updated patch for this problem
Ok, I have now tried it with gcc-4.0-20050220 and
--- Additional Comments From falk at debian dot org 2005-02-27 11:16
---
The C standard does in fact not allow this conversion. However,
I agree that it might be nice to have an option for semantics as in the
C++ standard (4.4). They allow this, and it is safe.
--
--- Additional Comments From falk at debian dot org 2005-02-27 11:23
---
Here's a paper about this if anybody wants to do this systematically:
Saman Amarasinghe, Walter Lee, Ben Greenwald.
Strength Reduction of Integer Division and Modulo Operations
LCPC 2001
--- Additional Comments From kmk at ssl dot org 2005-02-27 12:48 ---
I'm not sure I understand why it is thought that the C standard forbids the
conversion I'm talking about here. In fact, the final committee draft of the ISO
C standard that I have appears to be silent about the issue of
The attached invalid program ICEs mainline and 4.0
--
Summary: ICE with covariancy
Product: gcc
Version: 4.0.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: c++
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu
--- Additional Comments From Thomas dot Koenig at online dot de 2005-02-27
12:52 ---
Is this really fixed?
Look at this:
$ cat c-div.c
#include math.h
#include complex.h
int main()
{
float a;
complex float b,c;
foo(a,b);
c = b/a;
return creal(c) + cimag(c) 0;
}
$
--- Additional Comments From nathan at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-27
12:59 ---
Created an attachment (id=8292)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8292action=view)
test case
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20232
--
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |nathan at gcc dot gnu dot
|dot org |org
Status|UNCONFIRMED
--- Additional Comments From joseph at codesourcery dot com 2005-02-27
13:05 ---
Subject: Re: New: GCC generates non-compliant warnings for
qualifier promotion
On Sun, 27 Feb 2005, kmk at ssl dot org wrote:
For any qualifier q, a pointer to a non-q-qualified type may be converted
--- Additional Comments From falk at debian dot org 2005-02-27 13:20
---
(In reply to comment #5)
Am I wrong? Where does it state in the C standard that you cannot perform a
multi-level qualifier promotion?
Nowhere. It follows from the fact that it is not allowed explicitly in
--- Additional Comments From tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-27 13:54
---
Patch here: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2005-02/msg00357.html
--
What|Removed |Added
While trying to compile the 2.6.10 kernel I get the following error everytime.
Never seeen this error before, and looks to be a bug.
drivers/mmc/mmc_block.c: In function `mmc_blk_issue_rq':
drivers/mmc/mmc_block.c:183: warning: `req' is deprecated (declared at
include/linux/mmc/mmc.h:60)
CC [M]
--- Additional Comments From dir at lanl dot gov 2005-02-27 14:05 ---
Looks like a missing call to library_end ()in open.c. I added that one line and
the recursive error went away -
[dir:~/tests/gfortran] dir% gfortran -o recursive3 recursive3.f
[dir:~/tests/gfortran] dir% recursive3
--- Additional Comments From hp at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-27 14:39
---
It's about time to close this one, the test-case being removed and all...
--
What|Removed |Added
--
Bug 19745 depends on bug 18491, which changed state.
Bug 18491 Summary: testsuite failure: WARNING: g++.old-deja/g++.mike/p10769a.C
compilation failed to produce executable
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18491
What|Old Value |New Value
--- Additional Comments From hp at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-27 14:51
---
Update. Remaining from the original list (i.e. new ones uncounted)
are, as of LAST_UPDATED Sun Feb 27 01:30:09 UTC 2005:
Running /home/hp/combined/combined/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/dg.exp ...
WARNING:
--- Additional Comments From schwab at suse dot de 2005-02-27 14:54 ---
Casting to an integer does not remove the qualifier from the target type, it
removes the target type completely. Since an integer is not a pointer, there
cannot be a target type any more. So the documentation is
--- Additional Comments From joseph at codesourcery dot com 2005-02-27
14:59 ---
Subject: Re: -Wcast-qual option is easily evaded
On Sun, 27 Feb 2005, schwab at suse dot de wrote:
Casting to an integer does not remove the qualifier from the target type, it
removes the target type
--- Additional Comments From schwab at suse dot de 2005-02-27 15:09 ---
Only happens with --enable-checking.
--
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-27
15:21 ---
Obviously you did not read:URL:http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.html as instructed. We
need the
preprocessed source.
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-27
15:34 ---
Confirmed, a regression also. It worked with 20050113.
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-27
15:40 ---
Patch here: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-02/msg01723.html.
--
What|Removed |Added
g++-4.0s give the following incorrect error on valid code (it should be
accepted, I think):
gcc4rejectvalid.cc:25: error: 'persistent_object_manager' has not been declared
Run command
g++-4.0 -v --save-temps -c gcc4rejectvalid.cc -o gcc4rejectvalid.o
Output with version specs:
Using built-in
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-27
15:50 ---
Ignore the sources in comment #0, I got the definition wrong.
The following is the way libjava produces the code (now I don't know if this is
valid or not):
source 1 -
struct a
{
virtual void
--- Additional Comments From coudert at clipper dot ens dot fr 2005-02-27
15:54 ---
Patch submitted: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2005-02/msg00362.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20101
--- Additional Comments From coudert at clipper dot ens dot fr 2005-02-27
16:01 ---
Portland, Sun, Intel and SX compilers does it with no leading blank. MIPSpro
compiler is the only I could find that puts leading blanks.
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From schwab at suse dot de 2005-02-27 16:08 ---
I can reproduce it with a cross compiler from powerpc64-linux.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20225
--- Additional Comments From hjl at lucon dot org 2005-02-27 16:16 ---
__attribute__ ((visibility (hidden))) is a new feature. We can define
ASM_OUTPUT_EXTERNAL to make it work properly. I can try to come up with
a patch if everyone agrees is a bug.
--
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-27
16:17 ---
Subject: Bug 17728
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: gcc-4_0-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-02-27 16:17:09
Modified files:
gcc:
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-27
16:19 ---
(In reply to comment #7)
__attribute__ ((visibility (hidden))) is a new feature. We can define
ASM_OUTPUT_EXTERNAL to make it work properly. I can try to come up with
a patch if everyone agrees is a bug.
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-27
16:32 ---
Subject: Bug 17728
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-02-27 16:32:15
Modified files:
gcc: ChangeLog
gcc/config/pa :
--- Additional Comments From hjl at lucon dot org 2005-02-27 16:32 ---
My guess is this is an ELF only bug. I don't beleive ppc-darwin is an ELF
target.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20218
--- Additional Comments From schwab at suse dot de 2005-02-27 16:33 ---
Broken by this change:
2005-01-01 Richard Henderson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR c/19031
* c-decl.c (pop_file_scope): Call maybe_apply_pending_pragma_weaks.
* c-lang.c (finish_file): Don't
/sodsim/local/gcc-4.0-20050220#gcc -v
Using built-in specs.
Target: sparc-sun-solaris2.8
Configured with: ../configure --enable-languages=c,f95
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.0.0 20050220 (experimental)
Build with no problems.
This little test program was created as a result of a runtime error
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-27
17:14 ---
Subject: Bug 20206
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-02-27 17:13:28
Modified files:
gcc/cp : ChangeLog
gcc/testsuite :
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-27
17:15 ---
Subject: Bug 17728
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: gcc-3_4-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-02-27 17:14:38
Modified files:
gcc:
/sodsim/local/gcc-4.0-20050220#gcc -v
Using built-in specs.
Target: sparc-sun-solaris2.8
Configured with: ../configure --enable-languages=c,f95
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.0.0 20050220 (experimental)
Build with no problems.
This little test program was created as a result of a runtime error
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-27
17:23 ---
Subject: Bug 20206
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: gcc-4_0-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-02-27 17:22:58
Modified files:
gcc/cp :
--- Additional Comments From jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-27 17:25
---
Fixed in CVS.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
--
What|Removed |Added
OtherBugsDependingO||20235
nThis||
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20236
--- Additional Comments From blime at cox dot net 2005-02-27 17:26 ---
added input data to bug 20236 omitted in 20235 bug report
--
What|Removed |Added
BugsThisDependsOn|
--- Additional Comments From danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-27
17:29 ---
Fixed http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-02/msg01732.html.
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From coudert at clipper dot ens dot fr 2005-02-27
17:32 ---
Proposed patch: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2005-02/msg00374.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18025
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-27
18:11 ---
Subject: Bug 20175
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: gcc-3_4-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-02-27 18:10:42
Modified files:
gcc/cp :
--- Additional Comments From jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-27 18:12
---
Fixed in CVS.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
--- Additional Comments From tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-27 18:16
---
I committed a patch for this February 23rd, verified that it also fixes this PR.
I had checked bugzilla for this bug, but only before you opened this PR ;-)
--
What|Removed
--- Additional Comments From tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-27 18:18
---
We should probably call fflush() in the following places:
- at the beginning of a Fortran I/O operation
- at termination of the program
anywhere else?
--
What|Removed
--- Additional Comments From tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-27 18:32
---
Downgrading this to enhancement. 27 years of this not being allowed are a long
time.
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-27 18:34
---
*** Bug 20235 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20236
--- Additional Comments From tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-27 18:34
---
I didn't see any difference between this ans PR20236 except the missing input
data.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 20236 ***
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-27 18:41
---
Fixed form testcase which doesn't need the data file:
program ntst
character*16 bufld
character*142 line
line = ' 1 a 154.3000 35.3000 rrrabcr'
1
--- Additional Comments From tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-27 18:43
---
Upgraded to normal severity, interoperability with g77 is important.
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From sbellon at sbellon dot de 2005-02-27 18:47
---
I have investigated further. There are further places in the C part of the GNAT
library that need changing because they are inconsistent.
In __gnat_portable_spawn in ada/adaint.c the spawn/exec calls are always
Not sure if this can really be considered a bug, it
certainly violates the C++ standard, but since I'm
using extensions (e.g. dlopen, dlclose)...
The problem is simple: in the main module, I have
an std::map std::string, Base* at namespace scope,
which is getting constructed before main is
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever Confirmed||1
Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00
--- Additional Comments From jvdelisle at verizon dot net 2005-02-27 19:13
---
Is anyone working on this? It is blocking some significant codes I am testing.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16531
--- Additional Comments From jaco at kroon dot co dot za 2005-02-27 19:25
---
Ok. The only reason I found this was cause I tried to compile quasar on my
system. The code I supplied was the most reduced form I could create that
duplicated the problem. As such I will attempt to make
--- Additional Comments From danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-27
19:37 ---
This appears to be a reload problem. The reason the insn isn't
recognized is that the REG_POINTER flag (f/frame-related) has been
lost. Under HP-UX the base register must be marked with the
REG_POINTER
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-27
19:45 ---
How did you configure gcc? Did you use --enable-__cxa_atexit?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20237
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-27
19:47 ---
Subject: Bug 20101
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-02-27 19:47:12
Modified files:
gcc/testsuite : ChangeLog
libgfortran:
--- Additional Comments From kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-27 19:49
---
This is not an enhancement and should be given the WONTFIX status.
Re-read the excerpt from the F77 standard that I quoted. If it
is not an outright error, then consider the implications that
this so-called
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-27
20:44 ---
Subject: Bug 20101
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: gcc-4_0-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-02-27 20:44:52
Modified files:
gcc/testsuite :
--- Additional Comments From tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-27 20:48
---
Fixed on both the mainline and the release branch.
--
What|Removed |Added
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.0.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20101
--- Additional Comments From tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-27 21:03
---
Reduced testcase:
module token_module2
COMMON /MPIPRIV/ MPI_BOTTOM
integer i
end module token_module2
use token_module2, only: mpi_bottom
use token_module2, only: i
end
Removing
The stuff below applies to the CVS head revision as well as 3.4.*.
Maybe there is a bug w.r.t. sign promotion of the results of signed/unsigned
mixed multiplication from 32 to 64 bits. IMHO the result should be signed
(shouldn't it?).
I'm a little bit confused w.r.t. to signed/unsigned
--
What|Removed |Added
CC||tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org
Target Milestone|--- |4.0.0
--
What|Removed |Added
Severity|critical|normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20238
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-27
21:08 ---
No I think this is invalid and here is why:
casting even to unsigned still sign extened.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20238
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-27
21:10 ---
This is invalid.
(unsigned int)(signed_char) is still signed extened.
if you don't want a sign extension do:
(unsigned int)(unsigned char)(signed_char).
--
What|Removed
--- Additional Comments From kmk at ssl dot org 2005-02-27 21:37 ---
1. A pointer is a derived type.
2. A derived type is not qualified by the qualifiers (if any) of the type from
which it is derived.
3. For any qualifier q, a POINTER to a non-q-qualified type may be converted to
a
--- Additional Comments From kmk at ssl dot org 2005-02-27 21:43 ---
6. I meant right-hand side not left-hand side.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20230
--- Additional Comments From coudert at clipper dot ens dot fr 2005-02-27
21:45 ---
I believe this bug, PR 20092 and PR 20131 are duplicates. We will be sure when
they get fixed, but I mention this here for the record.
I may not have time to work on this before a few weeks, but this
--- Additional Comments From kmk at ssl dot org 2005-02-27 21:55 ---
It is precisely because it is useful to programmers in the manner described
that a check is needed on it so that persons charged with the task of code
validation or modification do not have to read 250,000 lines of code
--- Additional Comments From kmk at ssl dot org 2005-02-27 22:03 ---
And furthermore, if it is so useful to be able to hide this behavior, why have
this option at all? Why force programmers to undertake the two-step bomb-arming
instead of just letting them do it in one step by casting
--- Additional Comments From ch at dot-heine dot de 2005-02-27 22:05
---
Subject: Re: signed/unsigned multiplication + sign extension
broken 32-64 bit sign promotion?
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-27
When feeding a preprocessed input file consisting of only a newline to gcc, it
gets a segmentation fault:
snaga:tmp rm -f test.i
snaga:tmp echo test.i
snaga:tmp gcc test.i
test.i:1: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault
Please submit a full bug report,
with preprocessed source if
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-27
22:29 ---
Confirmed, only happens in 3.4.x.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED
--- Additional Comments From joseph at codesourcery dot com 2005-02-27
22:30 ---
Subject: Re: GCC generates non-compliant warnings for qualifier
promotion
On Sun, 27 Feb 2005, kmk at ssl dot org wrote:
1. A pointer is a derived type.
2. A derived type is not qualified by the
--- Additional Comments From kmk at ssl dot org 2005-02-27 23:12 ---
But const char * isn't a qualified version of char *
Ahhh. Now I see your point. Amazingly enough, the C standard does not, under any
circumstances, permit objects (including the targets of pointers) to be
qualifier
sorry if this is a dupe, I've checked the summaries, but there are too many
about using to read each in detail.
I think this is a bug:
namespace A{int a;};
namespace C{
int a;
using A::a;
}
accepted.
if not, then this is one:
namespace A{int a;};
namespace C{
double a;
using A::a;
}
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-28
00:27 ---
Confirmed, a regression from 3.2.3.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-28
00:38 ---
Subject: Bug 20058
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-02-28 00:38:13
Modified files:
gcc/fortran: ChangeLog trans-types.c gfortran.h
--- Additional Comments From kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-28 00:42
---
Fixed.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-28
01:09 ---
(In reply to comment #3)
This worked with 4.0.0 20050113 but fails with 20050210.
To get a smaller window, it fails with 20050201.
Hmm, it passes with 20050225.
I think this was fixed by:
PR
The following invalid (well valid if we say that VLA is a GCC extension) ICE
in fold_convert:
templatetypename T void foo(T t)
{
int f[t];
}
Also we don't reject this with -pedantic in 2.95.3-3.4.0 either so that is not
a regression.
There might be missing a processing_template somewhere.
--
What|Removed |Added
Severity|minor |normal
Target Milestone|--- |4.0.0
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-28
01:42 ---
This has failed since at least 20040909.
The ICE is:
t1.cc:8: internal compiler error: in fold_convert, at fold-const.c:1952
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20208
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-28
01:45 ---
This worked with 3.5.0 20040909.
--
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2005-02-25
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-28
01:49 ---
And it fails with 20050113. Those are the two closest compilers I have.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20241
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.0.0 |---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18560
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-28
02:21 ---
Subject: Bug 19065
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-02-28 02:21:40
Modified files:
gcc: ChangeLog
gcc/config/cris:
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-28
02:33 ---
Subject: Bug 19065
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-02-28 02:33:40
Modified files:
libstdc++-v3 : ChangeLog
In some large functions, where all hardware registers are used
up and some pseudo-register need to be allocated on stack,
EXTRA_MEMORY_CONSTRAINT will have a pessimizing effect. Without
further analysis, it seems that it causes pseudo-registers to be
committed (too devoted) to memory with no
--- Additional Comments From hp at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-28 02:50
---
Fixed, see URL:http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-02/msg01769.html and
URL:http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-02/msg01770.html. But see also PR
20242.
--
What|Removed
1 - 100 of 118 matches
Mail list logo
