hi,
I configure GCC as follow:
PATH=/gnutools/bin:$PATH ; export PATH
mkdir -p /tmp/build/gcc
cd /tmp/build/gcc
/src/gcc-3.2.1/configure --target=mipsel-elf \
--prefix=/gnutools --enable-languages=c,c++ \
--with-gnu-as --with-gnu-ld --with-newlib \
--without-headers --disable-shared
Hello,
I'm working for an RD organization of STMicroelectronics. Within our
team we have decided to write a gcc back-end that produces CIL binaries
(compliant with ECMA specification, see
http://www.ecma-international.org/publications/standards/Ecma-335.htm).
Our main motivation is the
These are pngcrushed versions with linear dimensions between 50% and 80% of
the 200-pixel-high original.
how about using a svg image as a master instead of a png? It could be
scaled without loss. I attached a svg produced from the original png.
Thomas
gcc.svg.bz2
Description: Binary data
Eric Fisher wrote:
/src/gcc-3.2.1/configure --target=mipsel-elf \
--prefix=/gnutools --enable-languages=c,c++ \
--with-gnu-as --with-gnu-ld --with-newlib \
--without-headers --disable-shared --disable-threads
Build and install GCC
make
Wrong command, use 'make all-gcc ; make install-gcc',
David Edelsohn wrote:
Mark Mitchell writes:
Mark That seems unfortunate, but so be it.
Yes it is very unfortunate and not very convenient for the way
that most developers want to use the build infrastructure. There no
longer is an equivalent to make quickstrap. To rebuild only GCC,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I want a reduced test case for this problem for bugzilla, but don't
really know the exact cause. I _think_ code is being improperly
optimized away, but I don't know. This function is part of a
BigInteger library, and works perfectly upto and including -O2, but
On Mon, Jun 12, 2006 at 12:32:36PM +0100, Andrew Haley wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I want a reduced test case for this problem for bugzilla, but don't
really know the exact cause. I _think_ code is being improperly
optimized away, but I don't know. This function is part of a
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Mon, Jun 12, 2006 at 12:32:36PM +0100, Andrew Haley wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I want a reduced test case for this problem for bugzilla, but don't
really know the exact cause. I _think_ code is being improperly
optimized away, but I don't
On Mon, Jun 12, 2006 at 01:01:47PM +0100, Andrew Haley wrote:
I'm starting to be a little suspicious about host2little(). I wonder
if that's well-defined.
I'm just guessing here becasue I can't see the code. Is it possible
templatetypename T T swap_endian(T x)
{
char* a =
Roberto COSTA wrote on 06/12/06 03:50:
Every so often CIL looks to poke in the works of the mailing list, but I
haven't been able to track the current status of the discussion on the
topic.
We have started work on a bytecode representation that will initially be
used for link-time
On 6/12/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Jun 12, 2006 at 01:01:47PM +0100, Andrew Haley wrote:
I'm starting to be a little suspicious about host2little(). I wonder
if that's well-defined.
I'm just guessing here becasue I can't see the code. Is it possible
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Mon, Jun 12, 2006 at 01:01:47PM +0100, Andrew Haley wrote:
I'm starting to be a little suspicious about host2little(). I wonder
if that's well-defined.
I'm just guessing here becasue I can't see the code. Is it possible
templatetypename T
Steven Bosscher wrote on 06/09/06 19:12:
For gimple temporaries, are you planning on something different from
the current minimal decl (tree_decl_with_vis in tree.h; needs
re-indenting btw...)?
I was hoping to get away with just type, but I'm not sure if that's
possible yet.
/* All tree
On Mon, Jun 12, 2006 at 12:30:50PM +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Jun 12, 2006 at 02:21:21PM +0200, Richard Guenther wrote:
On 6/12/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Jun 12, 2006 at 01:01:47PM +0100, Andrew Haley wrote:
I'm starting to be a little
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Mon, Jun 12, 2006 at 02:21:21PM +0200, Richard Guenther wrote:
On 6/12/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Jun 12, 2006 at 01:01:47PM +0100, Andrew Haley wrote:
I'm starting to be a little suspicious about host2little(). I wonder
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Mon, Jun 12, 2006 at 12:30:50PM +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Jun 12, 2006 at 02:21:21PM +0200, Richard Guenther wrote:
On 6/12/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Jun 12, 2006 at 01:01:47PM +0100, Andrew Haley wrote:
Daniel Berlin wrote on 06/09/06 19:32:
/* This structure is for generic trees. */
struct tree_common GTY(())
{
struct tree_base base;
tree chain;
tree type;
union tree_ann_d *ann;
};
Why is there a chain in tree_common?
To avoid wholesale conversion. Initially, we are only
Hi,
I have been trying to build sparc elf executables from i386. I got
gcc,binutils and newlibc and configured them with target=sparc-elf .
Now when i got gcc and binutils working , i wrote a small program
test.c:
int main()
{
return 3;
}
i compiled it using sparc-elf-gcc -c test.c.
Does anyboby know where I ccan find an algorithm to parse a propositional
logic formula and obtain the associated binary tree? thanks
Paolo Bonzini writes:
Paolo So, let's please not confuse issues. I work in the GCC directory daily.
Paolo I type make there and it just works. You can even type make
Paolo quickstrap if you want:
Paolo I think this was your suggestion, and it was implemented.
Typing make in the gcc
On Mon, Jun 12, 2006 at 10:22:17AM -0400, David Edelsohn wrote:
Typing make in the gcc subdirectory does not do what I expect.
Then could you clarify what happens, and what you expect, please?
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery
Daniel Jacobowitz writes:
Daniel On Mon, Jun 12, 2006 at 10:22:17AM -0400, David Edelsohn wrote:
Typing make in the gcc subdirectory does not do what I expect.
Daniel Then could you clarify what happens, and what you expect, please?
The behavior prior to the top-level bootstrap
Diego Novillo wrote:
Roberto COSTA wrote on 06/12/06 03:50:
Every so often CIL looks to poke in the works of the mailing list, but I
haven't been able to track the current status of the discussion on the
topic.
We have started work on a bytecode representation that will initially be
Diego Novillo wrote:
The document in which Mark has announced the LTO briefly mentions
that CIL was not retained for dumping the IR, without giving an
explicit reason, so I think that we need a clear position from the
FSF whether such a backend is accepted to be part of GCC.
Yes,
On Jun 12, 2006, at 9:56 AM, Sebastian Pop wrote:
Could one of the SC people bring this question one level up?
I don't know if this is relevant at this point but GCC did have
at one point did have a Java byte code outputter but it was
removed on the request of RMS.
-- Pinski
On Jun 12, 2006, at 5:45 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well, my point above was that -strict-aliasing is included in -O2 and
my code works fine at -O2. Only -O3 causes problems, so I didn't
expect
-fno-strict-aliasing to make any difference.
Code in violation of the aliasing rules can appear
Roberto COSTA wrote:
Diego Novillo wrote:
Sebastian Pop wrote on 06/12/06 12:40:
This page has no discussion about a CIL backend.
Note that I never said 'CIL'. I specifically said 'bytecode
representation'. The work being done for LTO will have some points in
common with an effort to
On Mon, Jun 12, 2006 at 03:20:20PM +0200, Riccardo wrote:
Does anyboby know where I ccan find an algorithm to parse a propositional
logic formula and obtain the associated binary tree? thanks
Please don't ask questions like that on this list.
On Mon, Jun 12, 2006 at 12:00:36PM -0400, Daniel Berlin wrote:
Roberto COSTA wrote:
It looks like you don't assume such an approval as granted... may I ask
you why?
Because they have a history of not granting such things, believing that
it serves to hinder, not further, the goal of free
Paolo Bonzini wrote:
This was caused by:
2006-01-22 Zack Weinberg [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* genautomata.c: Include vec.h, not varray.h.
The problem that Mark reported happens because (since always) the CFLAGS
of the gcc directory are just -g, not -O2 -g. Optimized builds have
On Mon, 12 Jun 2006 09:50:13 +0200, Roberto COSTA [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Hello,
I'm working for an RD organization of STMicroelectronics. Within our
team we have decided to write a gcc back-end that produces CIL binaries
(compliant with ECMA specification, see
Ori Bernstein wrote:
Perhaps you could collaborate with him, or (as I believe the Summer of Code
rules might require) build off his work after it gets submitted. I'd suggest
you contact the Mono project about it.
How could SoC rules in any way restrict what third
parties can do?
On Mon, 12 Jun 2006 13:26:41 -0400, Robert Dewar [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
How could SoC rules in any way restrict what third
parties can do?
It would restrict whether he could collaborate with a 3rd party.
--
When does summertime come to Minnesota, you ask? Well, last year, I
think it was a
On Mon, 12 Jun 2006 10:36:49 -0700, Joe Buck [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Free software is all about collaboration with third parties, as I'm
sure that the SoC people are well aware.
True. I'd still suggest asking and making sure, since I know for a fact that
students aren't allowed to work
Monika Sapra wrote:
I am not able to understand, why the checkout source of GCC is so large in
size? I am using the following command to checkout source:
See the info in the wiki. It talks about ways to reduce disk space.
http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/SvnHelp
--
Jim Wilson, GNU Tools Support,
Niklaus wrote:
when i executed a.out on sparc machine it segfaulted and dumped core.
On what kind of sparc machine? It sounds like you tried to run the code
on a sparc-solaris or sparc-linux machine, which won't work. sparc-elf
code can only be run on bare hardware.
Try building a cross
Ok, I think I have tracked this down to having broken the aliasing
rules, and for the sake of completeness, here was the problem:
Recall that the (big picture) code works fine at -O2, but fails at
-O3. The problem seemed to stem from this inline assembly function:
void longcpy(long* _dst, long*
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
void longcpy(long* _dst, long* _src, unsigned _numwords)
{
asm volatile (
cld \n\t
rep \n\t
movsl \n\t
// Outputs
:
// Inputs
: S (_src), D (_dst), c (_numwords)
// Clobbers
Hi,
I have some software that uses the BOOST matrix library UBLAS (1.33.1).
With GCC 4.1.1 this software compile fine (Debian Linux system - GNU
ld). However, with GCC 4.2 I get lots of errors, but I am not sure if
this is a bug or not:
substitution.o:(.data+0x0): multiple definition of
Benjamin Redelings [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
substitution.o:(.data+0x0): multiple definition of
`_ZN5boost7numeric5ublas21scalar_divides_assignIT_T0_E8computedE'
I can't make sense of that as a mangled name. It has template
parameter references but no template definition. That suggests that
--- Comment #3 from echristo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-12 06:44
---
Subject: Bug 27542
Author: echristo
Date: Mon Jun 12 06:44:23 2006
New Revision: 114561
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=114561
Log:
2006-06-11 Eric Christopher [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR
--- Comment #4 from echristo at apple dot com 2006-06-12 06:45 ---
2006-06-11 Eric Christopher [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR 27542
* doc/extend.texi (Structure-Packing Pragmas): Document ms_struct
pragma.
--
echristo at apple dot com changed:
What
--- Comment #8 from echristo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-12 06:53
---
Subject: Bug 27948
Author: echristo
Date: Mon Jun 12 06:53:33 2006
New Revision: 114562
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=114562
Log:
2006-06-11 Eric Christopher [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR
--- Comment #9 from echristo at apple dot com 2006-06-12 06:54 ---
2006-06-11 Eric Christopher [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR middle-end/27948
* stor-layout.c (place_field): Remove check for
--- Comment #8 from ayers at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-12 06:58 ---
Subject: Bug 27963
Author: ayers
Date: Mon Jun 12 06:58:27 2006
New Revision: 114563
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=114563
Log:
2006-06-12 David Ayers [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR
--- Comment #5 from ayers at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-12 06:58 ---
Subject: Bug 19970
Author: ayers
Date: Mon Jun 12 06:58:27 2006
New Revision: 114563
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=114563
Log:
2006-06-12 David Ayers [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR
--- Comment #9 from ayers at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-12 07:04 ---
Fixed for 4.2.0
--
ayers at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
--- Comment #3 from jv244 at cam dot ac dot uk 2006-06-12 07:18 ---
(In reply to comment #0)
still failing ... since it has been opened about 2.5y ago, should it be closed
as wontfix ?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12821
In the following, the assignment to str gets truncated twice.
gfortran -Wall does not give any warning.
Expected: As similar warning as NAG gives:
Warning: trunc.f90, line 2: Initialisation expression for STR truncated
At least the first initalization should be detected, possibly also the
--- Comment #4 from micis at gmx dot de 2006-06-12 10:24 ---
I tried an actual snapshot of gcc (gcc-4.2-20060603) on this source and the ICE
no longer occured.
Michael Cieslinski
--
micis at gmx dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #7 from dnovillo at redhat dot com 2006-06-12 12:12 ---
Subject: Re: [4.0/4.1/4.2 regression] ICE in cp_expr_size
with volatile and call to static
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote on 06/05/06 18:37:
Diego, what say you?
Shouldn't COMPLETE_TYPE_P imply that we can
--- Comment #4 from tbm at cyrius dot com 2006-06-12 12:15 ---
(In reply to comment #3)
I'm really on mipsel.
... but you can also see it with a x from i386 to mipsel.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27861
--- Comment #2 from m_ansoor at yahoo dot com 2006-06-12 12:43 ---
Hi,
An echo of $PATH shows:
/toolkit/newbin:/usr/local/bin:/usr/bin:/etc:/usr/sbin:/usr/ucb:/usr/bin/X11:/sbin:/usr/java14/jre/bin:/usr/java14/bin
On the configure line, I had specified --prefix=/toolkit
Is it possible
--- Comment #2 from reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-12 12:45
---
Well, the Internal Error at the end of the eror message doesn't look
like the right thing to me:
Internal Error at (1):
gfc_get_default_type(): Bad symbol
And this happens since GCC 4.0.0. I.e. GCC 4.0.x,
See Fortran 2003 standard, section 4.8.
Example (F2003, Note 4.70):
(/ CHARACTER(LEN=7) :: Takata, Tanaka, Hayashi /)
Currently, this gives the error:
a = (/ character(len=7) :: 'Takata', 'Tanaka', 'Hayashi' /)
1
Error: Syntax error in array constructor at (1)
The following constructor seems to be invalid according to the Fortran 2003
standard:
(/ 'Takata', 'Tanaka', 'Hayashi' /)
as first two strings are 6 whereas the last one is 7 character long.
NAG f95 fails with the following error:
Error: string.f90, line 3: Array constructor values have
--- Comment #28 from danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-12 13:21
---
See hang on hppa1.1-hp-hpux10.20 for c974013. I don't know whether
these are the same problem but c974004 and c974005 are also failing
on this target:
,.,. C974004 ACATS 2.5 06-06-11 23:43:09
C974004
raised STORAGE_ERROR : stack overflow detected
Stack size is set to 8192 kbytes. This doesn't happen all
the time.
--
Summary: FAIL: c64005c
Product: gcc
Version: 4.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
--- Comment #12 from martinol at nrlssc dot navy dot mil 2006-06-12 13:39
---
Created an attachment (id=11652)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=11652action=view)
mips-sgi-irix6.5/libstdc++-v3/config.log
from gcc-4.1-20060428 build
--
--- Comment #3 from kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-12 14:23 ---
I don't see the internal error.
laptop:kargl[205] cat r.f90
subroutine FOO
character*20 X 0
data X /'A'/0
end subroutine FOO
laptop:kargl[206] gfc -c r.f90
In file r.f90:3
--- Comment #3 from matz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-12 14:40 ---
Is this still a problem David? On x86_64 the libunwind-0.98.5 doesn't work
for ptrace (missing implemented functions), so I can't reproduce anything
on that platform. And on ia64-linux with a 4.1.x compiler
,objc,obj-c++ --enable-threads
--enable-checking --prefix=/somepath/gcc-4.2-20060612 --with-gmp=/somepath/GMP
--with-mpfr=/somepath/MPFR
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.2.0 20060612 (experimental)
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27954
--- Comment #7 from dirk dot behme at googlemail dot com 2006-06-12 15:34
---
Until a fix for this bug is found, there are two possible workarounds:
- Compile kernels sound system as modules and compile these modules with -O1
instead of default -Os or -O2 (e.g. by changing main
I'd expect that at least the same code is generated for both cases as opposed
to creating worse code for the case where an explicit assignment is done.
I had hoped that the explicit assignment actually creates smaller code.
$ gcc -DDOINC -Os -march=i386 -c -o scan.o.orig scan.c
$ gcc -UDOINC -Os
--- Comment #5 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-12 16:30
---
This is not DLL-related, the following code doesn't have the expected behaviour
(although it works fine on i686-linux, even in the static case):
$ cat ctesti.c
#include stdio.h
void print_from_gcc(char* txt) {
The decNumber sources files in libdecnumber were contributed by IBM and are
currently covered by the GPL. When GCC is configured with
--enable-decimal-float, some of these functions are included in the static
version of libgcc. The license needs to change from GPL to GPL plus exception.
I've
--- Comment #4 from ro at techfak dot uni-bielefeld dot de 2006-06-12
17:45 ---
Subject: Re: [4.2 Regression] Ada bootstrap failure on Solaris 10/x86
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org writes:
Right, it's another kind of SJLJ exceptions, purely front-end based. Excerpt
from
--- Comment #19 from tbm at cyrius dot com 2006-06-12 18:03 ---
Created an attachment (id=11654)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=11654action=view)
C test case
Here's a C test case (from the Linux kernel).
5289:[EMAIL PROTECTED]: ~] /usr/local/bin/gcc -c -O2 --param
--- Comment #13 from martinol at nrlssc dot navy dot mil 2006-06-12 18:04
---
Created an attachment (id=11655)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=11655action=view)
./mips-sgi-irix6.5/libstdc++-v3/config.log
This is from gcc-4.1-20060512 snapshot. So between 20060428
--- Comment #5 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-12 18:11
---
Ok, I see. Thanks for the explanation. Any reason this is done this way?
Solaris/SPARC doesn't use this, nor does Linux/x86, so it seems like both
the Solaris and x86 parts of the code are there.
Short
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-12 18:43 ---
The reason why increment is smaller is because the inc instruction is smaller
than loading a constant.
This is a target specific optimization as most other targets, it is going to be
about the same.
--
pinskia
--- Comment #9 from sayle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-12 18:55 ---
Subject: Bug 21210
Author: sayle
Date: Mon Jun 12 18:50:22 2006
New Revision: 114573
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=114573
Log:
PR c++/21210
* typeck2.c (build_functional_cast):
--- Comment #3 from pluto at agmk dot net 2006-06-12 19:15 ---
still ice.
--
pluto at agmk dot net changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail|2.95 3.0.4 3.2.2 4.0.0
with: /net/rosie/scratch1/rwgk/gcc_trunk/configure
--prefix=/usr
/local_cci/gcc_trunk_2006_06_12_0834_fc5_x86_64 --enable-languages=c,c++
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.2.0 20060612 (experimental)
*/
--
Summary: optimizer bug
Product: gcc
Version
--- Comment #1 from rwgk at yahoo dot com 2006-06-12 19:28 ---
Created an attachment (id=11656)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=11656action=view)
short reproducer
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28003
--- Comment #2 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-12 19:43 ---
This will never be implemented.
--
steven at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
GNU Fortran 95 (GCC) 4.2.0 20060612.
If I write a program with a intent(out) variable and this varibale is not set,
gfortran only writes:
warning: unused variable C
Expected: Default warning like ifort/NAG f95/g95:
In file ff.f90:7
subroutine sub(a)
1
Warning (158): INTENT
--- Comment #20 from tbm at cyrius dot com 2006-06-12 20:18 ---
Finally, a *small* test case.
5336:[EMAIL PROTECTED]: ~/tmp/delta/bin] /usr/local/bin/gcc -c -O1 --param
ggc-min-expand=0 --param ggc-min-heapsize=0 mini.c
mini.c:27: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault
Please
--- Comment #2 from reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-12 20:51
---
Subject: Bug 27951
Author: reichelt
Date: Mon Jun 12 20:50:53 2006
New Revision: 114577
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=114577
Log:
PR c++/27951
* decl2.c (finish_anon_union):
--- Comment #3 from reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-12 20:55
---
Subject: Bug 27951
Author: reichelt
Date: Mon Jun 12 20:55:42 2006
New Revision: 114578
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=114578
Log:
PR c++/27951
* decl2.c (finish_anon_union):
--- Comment #4 from reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-12 21:00
---
Subject: Bug 27951
Author: reichelt
Date: Mon Jun 12 21:00:31 2006
New Revision: 114579
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=114579
Log:
PR c++/27951
* decl2.c (finish_anon_union):
--- Comment #5 from reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-12 21:03
---
Fixed on mainline, 4.1 branch, and 4.0 branch.
--
reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #7 from dnovillo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-12 21:10
---
This is still an issue. http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2006-06/msg00178.html
--
dnovillo at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-12 21:13
---
Subject: Bug 27933
Author: reichelt
Date: Mon Jun 12 21:12:52 2006
New Revision: 114580
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=114580
Log:
PR c++/27933
* name-lookup.c
--- Comment #7 from dnovillo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-12 21:10
---
This is still an issue. http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2006-06/msg00178.html
I think this is only an issue when you have a normal multi lib x86_64 but use
--disable-multilib.
-- Pinski
--- Comment #8 from pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu 2006-06-12 21:18
---
Subject: Re: Cannot find libgomp.spec after 'make install' on x86_64 and ppc64
--- Comment #7 from dnovillo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-12 21:10
---
This is still an issue.
--- Comment #3 from reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-12 21:18
---
Subject: Bug 27933
Author: reichelt
Date: Mon Jun 12 21:18:20 2006
New Revision: 114581
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=114581
Log:
PR c++/27933
* name-lookup.c
--- Comment #4 from reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-12 21:23
---
Subject: Bug 27933
Author: reichelt
Date: Mon Jun 12 21:23:30 2006
New Revision: 114582
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=114582
Log:
PR c++/27933
* name-lookup.c
--- Comment #5 from reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-12 21:24
---
Fixed on mainline, 4.1 branch, and 4.0 branch.
--
reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
20060612 and 4.1.0 (SUSE Linux)):
3.00 3.00 0.00
Should be: 8.0 8.0 0.0
ifort, g95 and NAG f95 give the correct result (8. 8. 0.0).
--
Summary: gfortran: mathmul produces wrong result
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status
--- Comment #16 from reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-12 21:34
---
Subject: Bug 27421
Author: reichelt
Date: Mon Jun 12 21:34:32 2006
New Revision: 114583
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=114583
Log:
PR target/27421
* config/i386/i386.c
--- Comment #17 from reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-12 21:39
---
Subject: Bug 27421
Author: reichelt
Date: Mon Jun 12 21:39:10 2006
New Revision: 114584
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=114584
Log:
PR target/27421
* config/i386/i386.c
--- Comment #18 from reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-12 21:40
---
Now also fixed for unions (mainline, 4.1 branch, and 4.0 branch).
--
reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-12 21:57 ---
Created an attachment (id=11657)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=11657action=view)
patch
Here's a patch (regression-tested).
I'm not 100% sure this is the most elegant method, though.
--
-
This produces in gfortran:
Fortran runtime error: Attempt to allocate a negative amount of memory.
intfunc -1
Tested with 4.2.0 20060612 (experimental) and 4.1.0 (SUSE Linux).
--
Summary: Negative-sized array should be empty array, not try to
allocate
--- Comment #14 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2006-06-12 22:40 ---
Ok, thanks for your feedback. Indeed, the only possible cause of the problem
are the finer grained checks for wchar_t vs C99 wchar_t proper functions which
are now carried out after my 2006-05-03 commit (which fixed
--- Comment #14 from reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-12 22:56
---
Subject: Bug 27601
Author: reichelt
Date: Mon Jun 12 22:56:07 2006
New Revision: 114588
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=114588
Log:
PR c++/27601
* semantics.c
--- Comment #1 from kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-12 22:56 ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 27980 ***
--
kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-12 22:56 ---
*** Bug 28006 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #15 from reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-12 23:00
---
Subject: Bug 27601
Author: reichelt
Date: Mon Jun 12 23:00:00 2006
New Revision: 114589
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=114589
Log:
PR c++/27601
* semantics.c
1 - 100 of 121 matches
Mail list logo
