Ross Ridge wrote:
There are other MSC library functions that MinGW doesn't provide, so
libraries may not link even with a _chkstk alias.
Mark Mitchell wrote:
Got a list?
Probably the most common missing symbols, using their assembler
names are:
__ftol2
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Snapshot gcc-4.3-20061104 is now available on
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/4.3-20061104/
and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 4.3 SVN branch
with the following options: svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/trunk
Hello,
I have been playing with gcc's new (to me) auto vectorization
optimizations. I have a particular loop for which I have made external
provisions to ensure that the data is 16-byte aligned. I have tried
everything I can think of to give gcc the hint that it is operating on
aligned data, but
I've been setting up a Debian box to do builds on, and make bootstrap on
mainline is failing somewhere in the middle of Stage 1. The problem
appears to be that it's not looking in the right places for libgmp.so.3
when it calls ./gcc/xgcc at the end of the stage.
-
The box, for what it's
On Sat, Nov 04, 2006 at 10:57:14AM -0800, Brooks Moses wrote:
I've been setting up a Debian box to do builds on, and make bootstrap on
mainline is failing somewhere in the middle of Stage 1. The problem
appears to be that it's not looking in the right places for libgmp.so.3
when it calls
Could anyone comment on the following? Geoff introduced
fixes in r117741 to allow multilib builds on 32-bit PowerPC
processors on Darwin PPC. However the necessary changes for the
libjava subdirectory were never introduced. I have been
attempting to fix this by modelling a patch after the
Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
On Sat, Nov 04, 2006 at 10:57:14AM -0800, Brooks Moses wrote:
I've been setting up a Debian box to do builds on, and make bootstrap on
mainline is failing somewhere in the middle of Stage 1. The problem
appears to be that it's not looking in the right places for
On Sat, Nov 04, 2006 at 04:58:42PM -0800, Brooks Moses wrote:
Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
On Sat, Nov 04, 2006 at 10:57:14AM -0800, Brooks Moses wrote:
I've been setting up a Debian box to do builds on, and make bootstrap on
mainline is failing somewhere in the middle of Stage 1. The problem
On Sat, Nov 04, 2006 at 04:58:42PM -0800, Brooks Moses wrote:
I guess I was assuming that since GMP is supposedly only a prerequisite
for building the compiler and not for using it, that it was being linked
in statically rather than dynamically. But I guess that wouldn't apply
to xgcc,
Kenneth Zadeck wrote:
I think that it is time that we in the GCC community took some time to
address the problem of compiling very large functions in a somewhat
systematic manner.
While I agree with you, I think that there are so many things we are
already trying to address, that this one can
--- Comment #4 from pluto at agmk dot net 2006-11-04 09:10 ---
Created an attachment (id=12545)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=12545action=view)
patch from Uros Bizjak.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26915
--- Comment #5 from pluto at agmk dot net 2006-11-04 09:11 ---
with attached patch gcc42 produces:
$ ./xgcc -B. PR26915.c -m32 -S -Os -fomit-frame-pointer
.file PR26915.c
.text
.globl minus1
.type minus1, @function
minus1:
fld1
fchs
With the following testcase:
int a[100], b[100], d[100];
void link_error (void);
int g(int i, int j)
{
int *c;
int t;
c = i?a:b;
c++;
d[j] = 1;
c[j] = 2;
if (d[j] != 1)
link_error ();
return 0;
}
May-alias should figure out that c can only pointer to a or b but it gets
--- Comment #22 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-04 09:29 ---
ld --version
GNU ld version 2.17.50.0.3-6 20060715
But, I also tried this with --hash-style=sysv, and got the same results. I'll
try to figure out what's going on.
--
during building glibc:
gcc pthread_atfork.c -c -std=gnu99 -DNDEBUG=1 -O3 -Wall -Winline
-Wwrite-strings -fmerge-all-constants -g -Wstrict-prototypes -mlong-double-128
-mieee -DNOT_IN_libc -I../include
-I/usr/src/redhat/BUILD/glibc-20061029T2155/build-alpha-linuxnptl/nptl
--- Comment #1 from rezso at rdsor dot ro 2006-11-04 09:43 ---
Created an attachment (id=12546)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=12546action=view)
attached preproccesed file output.
Compiler output.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29709
--- Comment #2 from rezso at rdsor dot ro 2006-11-04 09:48 ---
With gcc 4.1.0 this not happen.
Cannot test latest greater than 4.1.1 becouse it require newer binutils
and we have another showstopper bug in newer binutils :-) [see
http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3449]
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-04 09:51 ---
Did you read what the internal error message said how to file a bug:
See URL:http://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla for instructions.
So why did you not file a bug with redhat first?
--
--- Comment #4 from rezso at rdsor dot ro 2006-11-04 09:54 ---
They dropped suport for alpha. We want to reshape the redhat port, and
ocasionaly fill bug reports here about alpha. I tgink if i post there, they
will be redirect here :-) [i am wrong on this ?]
Anyway is a cc targeted
--- Comment #5 from rezso at rdsor dot ro 2006-11-04 09:55 ---
Ok, i test with vanila 4.1.1, and repost the results.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29709
--- Comment #6 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-04 09:59 ---
(In reply to comment #4)
I tgink if i post there, they will be redirect here :-) [i am wrong on this ?]
but since you are using their modifed source, it might be hard to reproduce
with an FSF GCC which is why you
--- Comment #9 from lebedev at zhtw dot org dot ru 2006-11-04 10:40 ---
(In reply to comment #7)
Ok, thanks. Ideally, in case the problem unfortunately persists with current
GCC, it would be also useful if you could provide outputs from a debugging
session, because right now what
--- Comment #14 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2006-11-04 10:53 ---
According to PR 29705 (testcase is included in the PR) this is a wrong code bug
on 4.2 (and possibly others) branch.
--
ubizjak at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
$ gcc -c -fprefetch-loop-arrays -gnatpg -gnata -g0 -O1 \
-fno-inline -I- -I. -Iada -I../../gcc/ada \
../../gcc/ada/a-except.adb -o ada/a-except.o
raised STORAGE_ERROR : stack overflow (or erroneous memory access)
$ gcc -v
Reading specs from /usr/lib64/gcc/x86_64-pld-linux/4.2.0/specs
--- Comment #7 from rezso at rdsor dot ro 2006-11-04 11:36 ---
Hmm with vanila this bug dont show up.
Ok, i close this, and sorry for the wrong post :-(
--
rezso at rdsor dot ro changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #8 from patchapp at dberlin dot org 2006-11-04 13:02 ---
Subject: Bug number PR 27740
A patch for this bug has been added to the patch tracker.
The mailing list url for the patch is
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2006-11/msg00194.html
--
error_print parses the error message and replaces %L and %C by the special
string.
However, this clashes with translations, if the order of arguments is changed:
From gcc/po/de.po:
#: fortran/module.c:3369
#, no-c-format
msgid Symbol '%s' referenced at %L not found in module '%s'
msgstr Bei %2$L
--
burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
Last
--- Comment #15 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-04 13:30
---
But it's not a regression.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19116
--- Comment #10 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-04 14:04
---
Subject: Bug 29627
Author: tkoenig
Date: Sat Nov 4 14:04:27 2006
New Revision: 118480
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=118480
Log:
2006-11-04 Thomas Koenig [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR
--- Comment #11 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-04 14:05
---
Fixed on 4.1 as well, after regression-testing.
Closing.
--
tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from jb at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-04 14:15 ---
Confirmed.
I noticed it too when I was reviewing FX's external-blas patch. But the complex
version of matmul is generated from the same m4 sources as the real versions.
It might be that the middle- and/or back-end
--- Comment #4 from jb at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-04 14:18 ---
Can't you use the same trick that the frontend already uses to detect the
matmul(transpose(a),b) thing?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29550
--- Comment #4 from jb at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-04 14:28 ---
There is also some documentation in the ifort manual:
http://www.intel.com/software/products/compilers/flin/docs/main_for/mergedProjects/bldaps_for/format_of_record_types_.htm
--
jb at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
--- Comment #11 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-04 15:01
---
Mine.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from jens dot maurer at gmx dot net 2006-11-04 15:34 ---
I agree it's a duplicate of bug 19249, but I would not limit the discussion to
abstract classes.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 19249 ***
--
jens dot maurer at gmx dot net changed:
--- Comment #8 from jens dot maurer at gmx dot net 2006-11-04 15:34 ---
*** Bug 29706 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
jens dot maurer at gmx dot net changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #9 from jens dot maurer at gmx dot net 2006-11-04 15:44 ---
I would like to point out that C++ std ore issue 257 Abstract base
constructors and virtual base initialization (see
http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/cwg_active.html#257) deals with
this very issue. I
--- Comment #3 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2006-11-04
15:47 ---
Subject: Re: jc1: out of memory allocating 4072 bytes after a total of
708630224 bytes
jc1: out of memory allocating 4072 bytes after a total of 708630224 bytes
similiar problem here.
--- Comment #2 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2006-11-04
15:53 ---
Subject: Re: s-osinte.adb:86:13: warning: function To_Target_Priority is not
referenced
ll s-osinte.adb
lrwxrwxrwx 1 dave dave 53 Nov 3 02:33 s-osinte.adb -
--- Comment #16 from james dot me at gmail dot com 2006-11-04 16:26 ---
I applied Richard Guenther's patch to my own 4.2 svn branch to get this fixed
locally, but the change had no effect. I am a little puzzled by this, because
what I can discern from the discussion and comments the
--- Comment #17 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-04 16:32
---
There is another one in simplify-rtx.c:
Author: rguenth
Date: Sat Oct 21 10:13:13 2006
New Revision: 117928
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=117928
Log:
2006-10-21 Richard Guenther [EMAIL
Coming from PR 29489, but I think it's better to keep a separate PR about it:
$ cat a.f90
subroutine foo (x,n)
integer x(7,n,2,*)
print *, ubound(x,1)
print *, ubound(x,2)
print *, ubound(x,3)
! print *, ubound(x,4)
! print *, ubound(x)
end
integer i(7,4,2,9)
call foo(i,4)
end
$
--
fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
Last
--- Comment #1 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-04 16:46
---
Line 197 of testcase gfortran.dg/bound_2.f90 will have to be uncommented when
that bug is fixed.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29712
--- Comment #12 from hjl at lucon dot org 2006-11-04 16:53 ---
Created an attachment (id=12547)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=12547action=view)
A testcase to show array reference is ok
Gcc doesn't have a problem with array reference. That is if I change it
from
This is with:
gcc 42 r118474 *and* gcc-trunk r118474 on x86_64.
gfortran.dg/constant_substring.f fails with:
constant_substring.f:0: internal compiler error: Aborted
Minimal testcase:
character*2 a
character*4 b
parameter (a=12)
parameter (b = a(1:2))
end
Backtrace
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-04 17:21 ---
Confirmed.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-04 17:22 ---
This is just a case of error_print not understanding that syntax unlike the
rest of GCC which does. The translators should be told it does not support it
but we don't control them. This is an enhancement for
--- Comment #1 from tobias dot burnus at physik dot fu-berlin dot de
2006-11-04 17:24 ---
Fix: Reverting the change in gcc/fortran/expr.c of the following patch (which I
don't understand):
r118338 | fxcoudert | 2006-10-31 21:15:22 +0100 (Tue, 31 Oct 2006) | 12 lines
PR
--- Comment #13 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-04 17:28
---
(In reply to comment #12)
Created an attachment (id=12547)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=12547action=view) [edit]
A testcase to show array reference is ok
Gcc doesn't have a problem with
--- Comment #2 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-04 17:36
---
Will have to be fixed on mainline, 4.2 and 4.1: it's due to the fix of PR
29067.
--
fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
The change on the 19th caused a significant increase in memory
consumption http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2006-10/msg01029.html
and java bootstrap failures on s390, s390x and ia64. See this
thread http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2006-10/msg01058.html.
Except that all of these were fixed
--- Comment #4 from dberlin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-04 17:45 ---
Subject: Re: jc1: out of memory allocating 4072 bytes after a total of
708630224 bytes
The change on the 19th caused a significant increase in memory
consumption
--- Comment #3 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-04 18:09
---
Fixed by:
Index: gcc/fortran/expr.c
===
--- gcc/fortran/expr.c (revision 118455)
+++ gcc/fortran/expr.c (working copy)
@@ -1436,7 +1436,7 @@
--- Comment #5 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-04 18:21
---
(In reply to comment #4)
Can't you use the same trick that the frontend already uses to detect the
matmul(transpose(a),b) thing?
The front-end doesn't detect the case you quote. It's only that transposition
is
--
fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
Last
../hercules/general2.c: In function 'z900_test_and_set':
../hercules/general2.c:1415: error: unrecognizable insn:
(insn 130 128 131 17 (set (reg:QI 102)
(const_int 255 [0xff])) -1 (nil)
(nil))
../hercules/general2.c:1415: internal compiler error: in
extract_insn,
--- Comment #10 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2006-11-04 19:06 ---
(In reply to comment #9)
I bootstrapped a fresh gcc-4.1.1. Bug has disapeared.
Excellent. Likely, was a code generation bug.
So what do I do?
Is this bug worth
--- Comment #2 from phil dot sidler at attachmate dot com 2006-11-04 19:07
---
Created an attachment (id=12548)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=12548action=view)
preprocessed source gzipped
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29714
--- Comment #11 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2006-11-04 19:12 ---
(In reply to comment #9)
I'm using netbsd's pkgsrc collection to build packages on Tru64. But the
latest
version of gcc in it is 3.4.6.
Forgot: you may also consider reporting the bug to netbsd, or your favorite
--- Comment #23 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-04 20:16
---
ld --version
GNU ld version 2.17.50.0.3-6 20060715
I cannot reproduce with binutils mainline:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/build/binutils/native32 ld/ld-new --version
GNU ld version 2.17.50 20061104
How are binutils
--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-04 20:33 ---
how did you compile the testcase?
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from jb at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-04 20:34 ---
I did some experimenting, and it seems the C version of a trivial matrix
multiply program is much slower than the same program written in Fortran?
Switch the commented declarations and c[i][j] = 0 in the loop to get the
--- Comment #4 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-04 20:58
---
Subject: Bug 29713
Author: fxcoudert
Date: Sat Nov 4 20:58:26 2006
New Revision: 118483
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=118483
Log:
PR fortran/29713
* expr.c
--- Comment #3 from jb at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-04 21:24 ---
Well, redoing the C benchmark above to use 1d arrays and manual index
calculations, the results are now essentially the same as for the Fortran
version. And a commercial compiler produces about the same results for the
Take this valid testcase:
int main ()
{
static int a[] = { 0, 1, 2 };
int *i = a+3;
if (i-- a)
return 0;
return 0;
}
In the IR (in .orginal) we get:
if ( --i a - 4B)
which is incorrect and not really defined.
--
Summary: fold produces a - 4
Product: gcc
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-04 21:34 ---
Note: I found this while implementing PTR_PLUS_EXPR but that is because I did
not fix the part which does this optimization.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
Testcase, compile at -O2:
void abort (void);
void exit (int);
int t = 100;
int main () {
int a[] = { 0, 1, 2 };
int *i = a[sizeof(a)/sizeof(*a)];
i --;
while (i a)
i[0] = 1+t, i--;
if (a[1] != 1+t)
abort ();
exit (0);
}
--
Summary: [4.2/4.3 Regression] Wrong
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.2.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29716
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-04 22:07 ---
Confirmed. In final cleanup we have
main ()
{
int a[3];
int D.1620;
bb 2:
a[0] = 0;
D.1620 = t + 1;
a[2] = D.1620;
a[1] = D.1620;
if (D.1620 != 1) goto L3; else goto L4;
L3:;
abort ();
L4:;
--- Comment #5 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2006-11-04
22:07 ---
Subject: Re: jc1: out of memory allocating 4072 bytes after a total of
708630224 bytes
Except that all of these were fixed in the followup patch and a later
typo fix, *including* the memory usage (see
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-04 22:10 ---
Starting with DOM we have
bb 2:
# SFT.3_3 = V_MUST_DEF SFT.3_2;
a[0] = 0;
# SFT.2_5 = V_MUST_DEF SFT.2_4;
a[1] = 1;
# SFT.1_7 = V_MUST_DEF SFT.1_6;
a[2] = 2;
...
L2:;
# VUSE SFT.2_5;
Current SVN trunk.
gcc-build/gcc make info
gcc-build/gcc make html
works, however:
gcc-build/gcc make pdf
texi2pdf -I . -I /home/tob/projects/gcc/gcc/doc -I
/home/tob/projects/gcc/gcc/doc/include -o doc/gcc.pdf
/home/tob/projects/gcc/gcc/doc/gcc.texi
[...]
--- Comment #4 from jb at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-04 22:16 ---
For the C version with 1d arrays, the benchmark results, with gfortran results
for comparison, are
Complex version:
-O3 funroll-loops -mfpmath=sse -msse2
1.32
above + fast-math
0.38
gfortran -O2:
0.32
Real
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-04 22:18 ---
(In reply to comment #2)
Starting with DOM we have
No, DOM is not related to the problem.
Before alias2:
# SFT.3_31 = PHI SFT.3_22(3), SFT.3_3(2);
# SFT.2_30 = PHI SFT.2_21(3), SFT.2_5(2);
# SFT.1_29 = PHI
--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-04 22:33 ---
The points-to-set for i is wrong. The difference before the two aliasing
passes are
iD.1615_8 = aD.1614[3];
iD.1615_9 = iD.1615_8 - 4B;
goto bb 4 (L1);
# SUCC: 4 (fallthru)
# BLOCK 3
# PRED: 4 (true)
See the attachment for the preproccessed file and commandline + output.
--
Summary: when compiling dirac 0.6.0 with gcc 4.2.0 20061024, gcc
gives an internal compiler error
Product: gcc
Version: 4.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
--- Comment #1 from moshevds at gmail dot com 2006-11-04 22:39 ---
Created an attachment (id=12549)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=12549action=view)
the .ii and some other info
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29718
--- Comment #6 from uros at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-04 23:12 ---
Subject: Bug 26915
Author: uros
Date: Sat Nov 4 23:12:16 2006
New Revision: 118484
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=118484
Log:
PR target/26915
* config/i386/i386.c
--- Comment #7 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2006-11-04 23:15 ---
Fixed.
--
ubizjak at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
URL|
--- Comment #4 from phil dot sidler at attachmate dot com 2006-11-04 23:24
---
gcc -W -Wall -O3 -march=k8 -fomit-frame-pointer
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29714
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot
|dot org
--- Comment #5 from dberlin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-05 00:46 ---
Subject: Re: [4.2/4.3 Regression] Wrong code with arrays
so do we miss it because it's a PHI argument or because in the first case
we point one after the last element of the array and in the second case to
the
On newlib targets, the compiler fails to compile
long testlf (float x)
{
return __builtin_lceilf (x);
}
with the error
internal compiler error: in expand_builtin_int_roundingfn, at builtins.c:2298
--
Summary: newlib targets ICEs in expand_builtin_int_roundingfn
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-05 03:08 ---
Reducing.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29718
gcc version 4.3.0 20061104 (experimental)
Configured:
alpha1:mckelveyalias CONFIGURECVS
alias CONFIGURECVS='../gcc/configure --verbose --enable-languages=c++
--disable-linux-futex --disable-nls clog 21 '
Built:
alias BUILD='nice gmake CFLAGS='\'''\'' BOOT_CFLAGS='\'''\''
LIBCFLAGS='\''-g
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-05 05:20 ---
a missing __tls_get_addr might mean you don't have TLS in your glibc which
means you need to do --disable-tls.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #7 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-05 06:27 ---
Subject: Bug 29565
Author: pault
Date: Sun Nov 5 06:27:48 2006
New Revision: 118492
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=118492
Log:
2006-11-05 Francois-Xavier Coudert [EMAIL PROTECTED],org
--- Comment #19 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-05 06:27 ---
Subject: Bug 24518
Author: pault
Date: Sun Nov 5 06:27:48 2006
New Revision: 118492
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=118492
Log:
2006-11-05 Francois-Xavier Coudert [EMAIL PROTECTED],org
The libjava testsuite gets a FAIL in the gij PR12350 test. I traced this to a
SIGBUS in a yet to be determined location in verify.cc. When verify.cc is
compiled with -O0 the test PASSes.
This is with the svn trunk -r118192. I am fairly certain that the same problem
exists in the 4.2 branch as
--- Comment #1 from daney at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-05 07:10 ---
I guess I should note that i686 does not seem suffer from this bug.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29721
92 matches
Mail list logo
