--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-16
07:22 ---
Subject: Bug 18847
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-04-16 07:22:03
Modified files:
gcc/ada: a-nudira.adb a-nuflra.adb ChangeLog
--- Additional Comments From laurent at guerby dot net 2005-04-16 07:38
---
Could you try the obvious patch below?
It looks like the same problem as PR ada/17527
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17527
which was fixed the same way a while ago.
I believe you can commit as
--
What|Removed |Added
Component|target |c++
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21042
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-16
10:37 ---
Subject: Bug 20491
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-04-16 10:37:31
Modified files:
gcc: ChangeLog
gcc/config/ia64:
Why there is no 'input file error' when using -Wl,-wrap ?
$ gcc -shared -o champion.so
gcc: no input files
$ gcc -shared -o champion.so -Wl,-wrap -Wl,toto
$ ld -shared -o champion.so -wrap toto
ld: no input files
--
Summary:
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-16
10:43 ---
Subject: Bug 20491
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: gcc-4_0-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-04-16 10:43:07
Modified files:
gcc:
The following simple program doesn't link:
- Derived.h -
#ifndef Derived_hh
#define Derived_hh
#include istream
#include ostream
class D : public std::iostream
{
public:
~D() ;
} ;
#endif
- Derived.cc -
#include Derived.hh
D::~D()
{
}
- main.cc -
#include Derived.hh
--- Additional Comments From pcarlini at suse dot de 2005-04-16 11:53
---
Can you please try either a snapshot of 3.4.4 or 4.0? I'm pretty sure this is
already fixed: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-02/msg00308.html.
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From bagnara at cs dot unipr dot it 2005-04-16
12:27 ---
I can add the following:
1) the bug was not present in GCC 3.3.3 and is present since version 3.4.0, so I
think it qualifies as a regression;
2) the bug is also present in GCC 4.0.0 20050226 (prerelease),
Hallo.
I want to use the ISO C99 complex datatypes in c++ because they are faster than
the template complex types from std++.
g++ fails to work with ISO C99 complex in the following way:
typedefs+built-in-functions(conj)+unary minus are not working well together.
cat test.cpp
#include
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-16
13:06 ---
The following shows that this is a target issue:
{standard input}:105865: Error: suffix or operands invalid for `mov'
Also did you readh http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.html as instructed anyways.
--
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-16
13:10 ---
$ gcc -shared -o champion.so -Wl,-wrap -Wl,toto
Because we add -lgcc -lc and others, so this is not a bug at all.
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-16
13:12 ---
Fixed but really this is binutils bug but oh well.
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-16
13:15 ---
I want to use the ISO C99 complex datatypes in c++ because they are faster
than the template
complex types from std++.
Why do you say that? Well maybe before 4.0.0 it was slower but only slightly.
--
--
What|Removed |Added
Summary|ACATS cxa5012 SEGV on on|[4.0 only] ACATS cxa5012
|x86_64 |SEGV on on x86_64
Target
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-16
13:47 ---
Patch here: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-04/msg01691.html.
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From kazu at cs dot umass dot edu 2005-04-16 14:07
---
Patch posted:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-04/msg01830.html
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-16
15:15 ---
It is apparently not possible to convince people that any optimizations
in CSE can be removed, so working on this is pointless for me. See
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-04/msg01498.html.
--
--- Additional Comments From gnu_andrew at member dot fsf dot org
2005-04-16 15:47 ---
I'm attaching a patch which I've just committed to GNU Classpath CVS.
This fixes this problem, using java.net.URI for interpretation as suggested.
All methods also now follow a common scheme, via the
--- Additional Comments From uweigand at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-16
15:48 ---
The problem originates in find_reloads_subreg_address, which decides
to widen access to a memory reference. The instruction we have is:
(insn 129 127 130 10 (parallel [
(set (reg:SI 106)
Given the following test program:
cut here ---
import java.awt.*;
import javax.imageio.*;
public class ShowJPEGReader
{
public static void main (String args[])
{
System.out.println (Toolkit.getDefaultToolkit ());
--- Additional Comments From samedii at gmail dot com 2005-04-16 16:09
---
Okay, thanks.
Yes I did read the instructions for reporting bugs and I did my best with the
parts that I understod.
My jdk14 was not the absolute latest (it used the 6th patch instead of the 7th)
and right now
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-16
16:11 ---
Snce Sun's java code cannot be distributed, I am closing this as invalid.
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From samedii at gmail dot com 2005-04-16 16:15
---
What do I do then?
Update to a later version of gcc?
Report the bug to Sun?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21042
--- Additional Comments From jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-16 16:15
---
Much the same issue can arise with array references through
pointer-to-aligned-type, and with arithmetic on such pointers, as does with
array-of-aligned-type. However, having extra alignment on a DECL, as
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-16
16:18 ---
Well first report it to freebsd since that is where you got GCC from in the
first place and it is a modifed
compiler.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21042
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-16
16:32 ---
Confirmed.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
--- Additional Comments From samedii at gmail dot com 2005-04-16 16:33
---
thanks
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21042
--- Additional Comments From giovannibajo at libero dot it 2005-04-16
16:38 ---
Notice that the frontend shouldn't *ever* call fold. It's the optimizers' job
to adjust these things.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19637
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-16
16:38 ---
The C++ failures are most likely PR 20931.
--
What|Removed |Added
BugsThisDependsOn|
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-16
16:44 ---
Confirmed.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
--
What|Removed |Added
GCC build triplet|ppc-apple-darwin7.8 |
GCC host triplet|ppc-apple-darwin7.8 |
GCC target triplet|ppc-apple-darwin7.8 / avr- |avr
--- Additional Comments From aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-16 16:45
---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 12911 ***
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-16 16:45
---
*** Bug 21044 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-16 16:46
---
This is related to, but not the same as, 12911.
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-16
16:46 ---
Note the C.x variables are not normal VAR_DECLs but CONST_DECL so maybe avr
should be changed to
recongize them as such.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21018
=ia64-suse-linux --enable-shared
--enable-threads --enable-__cxa_atexit --with-system-zlib
--with-system-libunwind
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.0.0 20050416 (prerelease)
gcc/cc1 -fpreprocessed m68k-dis.i -quiet -dumpbase m68k-dis.i -auxbase
m68k-dis -O2 -W -Wall -version -o m68k-dis.s
GNU C
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-16
16:57 ---
This is a dup of bug 18399, the problem comes from recursively inlining.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 18399 ***
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-16
16:57 ---
*** Bug 21044 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
What|Removed |Added
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.1.0 |4.0.1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18399
--- Additional Comments From phython at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-16
17:12 ---
Created an attachment (id=8654)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8654action=view)
Fold stuff
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-16
17:37 ---
Fixed in 4.1.0 and above by Daniel's aliasing improvements.
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From rearnsha at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-16
17:50 ---
(In reply to comment #41)
Subject: Re: [PR target/20126, RFC] loop DEST_ADDR biv replacement may fail
Sure. Your patch in comment #28 of bugzilla PR20126 is OK for mainline
to resolve Josh's
--- Additional Comments From schlie at comcast dot net 2005-04-16 18:22
---
Subject: Re: Initializing string literal data
improperly marked frame-relative?, should be readonly static const.
Note the C.x variables are not normal VAR_DECLs but CONST_DECL so maybe avr
should be
--- Additional Comments From schlie at comcast dot net 2005-04-16 18:41
---
Subject: Re: Initializing string literal data
improperly marked frame-relative?, should be readonly static const.
From: Paul Schlie [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [Bug middle-end/21018] Initializing string
For a static member of a template class, the symbol doesn't appear to be
emitted.
For example, with the code:
/*BEGIN CODE*/
#include stdio.h
template class T
class Base {
public:
static int bob;
T a;
Base() { printf(Base::Base starting\n); fflush(stdout); }
~Base() {
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-16
19:05 ---
This is a dup of bug 11026 which is fixed for 4.0.0.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 11026 ***
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-16
19:05 ---
*** Bug 21060 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
What|Removed |Added
Said option has no effect.
--
Summary: gfortran ignores -Werror
Product: gcc
Version: 4.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: fortran
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-16
19:20 ---
Andrew could you look into this and see why the use info is not being updated
correctly?
Also note the patch in comment #4 is only working around the buggyness of the
use information not
being updated
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-16
19:26 ---
Confirmed.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-16
19:53 ---
Confirmed on x86-pc-linux-gnu with compiling the generated GdkFontMetrics.class
from gcj build
with the following command line.
gcj -S -gstabs -findirect-dispatch GdkFontMetrics.class
--
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-16
20:07 ---
Here is the backtrace:
#0 fold_convert (type=0xb7bf8288, arg=0x0) at
/home/peshtigo/pinskia/src/gnu/gcc/src/gcc/fold-
const.c:1883
#1 0x083be08f in bit_from_pos (offset=0xb7bf8288, bitpos=0xb7bf8288)
--- Additional Comments From andreast at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-16
20:16 ---
I just built the tree without awt-gtk enabled. The
gnu/java/awt/peer/gtk/GdkFontMetrics.class is built even without gtk enabled.
So, a command line compile of the class to .o is possible and makes the bug
--- Additional Comments From james dot kanze at free dot fr 2005-04-16
21:00 ---
Subject: Re: Linker errors when deriving from std::iostream
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2005-04-16 13:12 ---
Fixed but
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-16
21:42 ---
Subject: Bug 20126
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-04-16 21:42:27
Modified files:
gcc: ChangeLog loop.c
Log message:
--- Additional Comments From aoliva at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-16
21:48 ---
Subject: Re: [PR target/20126, RFC] loop DEST_ADDR biv replacement may fail
On Apr 15, 2005, Roger Sayle [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Sure. Your patch in comment #28 of bugzilla PR20126 is OK for mainline
--- Additional Comments From belyshev at depni dot sinp dot msu dot ru
2005-04-16 21:50 ---
Not fixed in 3.4.4
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED
--- Additional Comments From belyshev at depni dot sinp dot msu dot ru
2005-04-16 21:51 ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 2703 ***
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From belyshev at depni dot sinp dot msu dot ru
2005-04-16 21:51 ---
*** Bug 21026 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-16
21:53 ---
But fixed in 4.0.0 so closing as fixed as this is not a regression.
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From aoliva at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-16
21:58 ---
Subject: Re: [PR target/20126, RFC] loop DEST_ADDR biv replacement may fail
On Apr 15, 2005, Roger Sayle [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I agree with your proposed game plan of keeping the hard failure in
place
--- Additional Comments From aoliva at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-16
21:58 ---
Subject: Re: [PR middle-end/20739] lvalue cond-expr gimplification may crash on
cv-qual diffs
On Apr 15, 2005, Jeffrey A Law [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 2005-04-14 at 14:02 -0300, Alexandre Oliva
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|NEW
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17652
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|NEW
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19872
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20155
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|NEW
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18212
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20491
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19884
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19608
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|NEW
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19004
See attached patch.
My GCC superpowers aren't quite up to analyzing this, but I suppose this would
cause problems for e.g. the i2pk target as it would receive size=0 in its
arguments in the function below.
If this can't be sorted out by trivial inspection, please let me know and I'll
run some
--- Additional Comments From oyvind dot harboe at zylin dot com 2005-04-16
22:05 ---
Created an attachment (id=8661)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8661action=view)
Fixes declaration of printf()
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21062
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.0.0 |4.0.1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14325
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.0.0 |4.0.1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15266
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.0.0 |4.0.1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15235
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.0.0 |4.0.1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16991
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-16
22:37 ---
Fixed.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
--
What|Removed |Added
CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot
||org
Last reconfirmed|2005-01-23
'MAIN__':
bug.f90:12: internal compiler error: in gfc_conv_ss_descriptor, at
fortran/trans-array.c:1224
Please submit a full bug report,
bash-2.05b$ gfc --version
GNU Fortran 95 (GCC 4.1.0 20050416 (experimental))
Copyright (C) 2005 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
--
Summary: internal
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-16
22:54 ---
This is weird in that it works on ppc-darwin, maybe the altivec ABI is changing
something or the just
the ABI difference.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17961
The (to-be-shortly) attached testcase (which works with JDK 1.4.x)
causes a NullPointerException:
$ gcj -o SwStyle SwStyle.java --main=SwStyle -g
$ ./SwStyle
Exception in thread main java.lang.ExceptionInInitializerError
at java.lang.Class.initializeClass()
--- Additional Comments From bothner at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-16
23:05 ---
Created an attachment (id=8662)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8662action=view)
Testcase.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21064
--
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |rth at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org |
Status|UNCONFIRMED
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-16
23:19 ---
Subject: Bug 21051
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-04-16 23:19:35
Modified files:
gcc: ChangeLog builtins.c
--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-16 23:20
---
Fixed.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-16
23:22 ---
Confirmed.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
I am using a custom Class wich throws events, by using this I rely on the
EventListenerList Class to hold my Eventlisteners. The Method getListenerList is
used by the method
protected void fireFooXXX() {
// Guaranteed to return a non-null array
Object[] listeners =
--- Additional Comments From roger at eyesopen dot com 2005-04-17 00:21
---
Subject: Re: [PR target/20126, RFC] loop DEST_ADDR biv replacement may fail
Hi Alex,
On 16 Apr 2005, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
On Apr 15, 2005, Roger Sayle [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I agree with your proposed
--- Additional Comments From green at redhat dot com 2005-04-17 00:42
---
I'm seeing this same problem. GCC4 won't build reliably without this fix.
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From gruni dot ca at gmail dot com 2005-04-17
00:45 ---
Created an attachment (id=8663)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8663action=view)
Simple Testcase showing that addind a EventListener increments the list by one
This is a testcase I wrote,
--
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #8663|Simple Testcase showing that|Simple Testcase showing that
description|addind a EventListener |adding a EventListener
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-17
01:38 ---
Subject: Bug 21024
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-04-17 01:38:28
Modified files:
gcc: ChangeLog builtins.c fold-const.c
--- Additional Comments From kazu at cs dot umass dot edu 2005-04-17 01:41
---
Just checked in a patch.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
--
Bug 21021 depends on bug 21024, which changed state.
Bug 21024 Summary: fold generates a comparison of two operands whose types do
not match
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21024
What|Old Value |New Value
--- Additional Comments From mark at codesourcery dot com 2005-04-17 02:36
---
Subject: Re: [PR middle-end/20739] lvalue cond-expr gimplification may crash
on cv-qual diffs
Alexandre Oliva wrote:
Thanks, Roger had already approved it for mainline, but not yet for
the branch. Mark?
--- Additional Comments From aoliva at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-17
02:37 ---
Subject: Re: [PR target/20126, RFC] loop DEST_ADDR biv replacement may fail
On Apr 16, 2005, Roger Sayle [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Does this clear things up? Do you agree?
Yup, for both questions.
--- Additional Comments From mark at codesourcery dot com 2005-04-17 02:43
---
Subject: Re: [4.0/4.1 Regression] Miscompilation with
__attribute ((aligned))
jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
--- Additional Comments From jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-16
16:15 ---
--- Additional Comments From mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-17
02:44 ---
This patch is OK for 4.0.0 RC2. Please apply.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20929
--- Additional Comments From mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-17
02:46 ---
Jakub, thank you for applying this patch to the 4.0 branch.
If you've confirmed that the bug has been fixed, would you please remove 4.0
from the summary here, and from the known-to-fail list?
Thanks,
1 - 100 of 127 matches
Mail list logo
