strsignal problems on target=Cygwin have been kicking around for years.
This is a libiberty issue.
Maybe offtopic for gcc.
Or maybe the right place.
?
(and gcc vs. gcc-patches, similar, opening a bug seems too
heavyweight when an analysis/fix is (mostly) in hand..)
native cygwin
Hello,
I am building the gcc tools using the gcc trunk sources and my configuration is:
=
/gcc/trunk/configure --build=i686-pc-linux-gnu --host=i686-pc-mingw32
--prefix=/release --target=crx-elf --disable-nls --enable-languages=c,c++
--disable-libssp --with-mpfr=/scratch/mpfr-2.3.1/rel
Mail sent by error to [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I get the same error on i686-apple-darwin9 revision 139884.
Dominique
Building gcc from svn today I see the following:
prj-nmsc.adb: In function ‘Prj.Nmsc.Check_Naming_Schemes’:
prj-nmsc.adb:3272: warning: ‘Casing’ may be used uninitialized in this function
...
g-socket.adb: In function ‘GNAT.SOCKETS.SEND_SOCKET’:
g-socket.adb:1786: warning: ‘SIN’ is used
Status
==
The trunk is now in stage3 phase, so only bugfixes, documentation changes
and new ports are allowed at this point. As an exception the GRAPHITE
branch, which has been AFAIK mostly approved already but missed the deadline,
can be checked in within next two weeks.
Quality Data
Richard Sandiford wrote:
As I mentioned in:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2008-08/msg00476.html
I'd been working on a MIPS IRA port, but got side-tracked by a wrong-code
regression.
The regression was caused by incorrect EH liveness information. I tried
to fix it by replacing the
Vladimir Makarov [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Richard Sandiford wrote:
As I mentioned in:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2008-08/msg00476.html
I'd been working on a MIPS IRA port, but got side-tracked by a wrong-code
regression.
The regression was caused by incorrect EH
On Tue, Sep 2, 2008 at 6:00 AM, Jakub Jelinek [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The trunk is now in stage3 phase, so only bugfixes, documentation changes
and new ports are allowed at this point. As an exception the GRAPHITE
branch, which has been AFAIK mostly approved already but missed the deadline,
Is there any particular reason why
gcc-{ada,java,objc}-4.3.2.tar.bz2{,.sig} and
gcc-core-4.3.1-4.3.2.diff.gz{,.sig} are not on the GNU FTP site,
although they're present on sourceware.org?
ftp://sourceware.org/pub/gcc/releases/gcc-4.3.2/
ftp://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/gcc/gcc-4.3.2/
Jonathan
x86_64-*-freebsd8.0
FAIL: gfortran.dg/graphite/block-1.f90 -O (test for excess errors)
FAIL: gfortran.dg/graphite/block-2.f -O (test for excess errors)
FAIL: gfortran.dg/graphite/block-3.f90 -O (test for excess errors)
FAIL: gfortran.dg/graphite/block-4.f90 -O (test for excess errors)
Hi Steve,
On Tue, 2008-09-02 at 13:49 -0700, Steve Kargl wrote:
x86_64-*-freebsd8.0
FAIL: gfortran.dg/graphite/block-1.f90 -O (test for excess errors)
FAIL: gfortran.dg/graphite/block-2.f -O (test for excess errors)
FAIL: gfortran.dg/graphite/block-3.f90 -O (test for excess errors)
On Tue, Sep 02, 2008 at 05:57:07PM -0300, Tobias Grosser wrote:
Hi Steve,
On Tue, 2008-09-02 at 13:49 -0700, Steve Kargl wrote:
x86_64-*-freebsd8.0
FAIL: gfortran.dg/graphite/block-1.f90 -O (test for excess errors)
FAIL: gfortran.dg/graphite/block-2.f -O (test for excess errors)
All,
I logged the bootstrap fail on obj-c++ as 37335.
Ed Smith-Rowland
Hi Steve,
On Tue, 2008-09-02 at 13:59 -0700, Steve Kargl wrote:
On Tue, Sep 02, 2008 at 05:57:07PM -0300, Tobias Grosser wrote:
Hi Steve,
On Tue, 2008-09-02 at 13:49 -0700, Steve Kargl wrote:
x86_64-*-freebsd8.0
FAIL: gfortran.dg/graphite/block-1.f90 -O (test for excess errors)
On Tue, Sep 2, 2008 at 2:15 PM, Tobias Grosser
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
May be you missed to add --with-cloog or --with-ppl to
your ./configure.
Can you send me your config.log file?
I thought we had decided that the build would fail to happen if the
person did not have cloog and ppl
On Tue, Sep 2, 2008 at 11:19 PM, Andrew Pinski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Sep 2, 2008 at 2:15 PM, Tobias Grosser
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
May be you missed to add --with-cloog or --with-ppl to
your ./configure.
Can you send me your config.log file?
I thought we had decided that the
On Tue, Sep 2, 2008 at 2:20 PM, Richard Guenther
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Sep 2, 2008 at 11:19 PM, Andrew Pinski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Sep 2, 2008 at 2:15 PM, Tobias Grosser
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
May be you missed to add --with-cloog or --with-ppl to
your ./configure.
On Tue, 2 Sep 2008, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
Is there any particular reason why
gcc-{ada,java,objc}-4.3.2.tar.bz2{,.sig} and
gcc-core-4.3.1-4.3.2.diff.gz{,.sig} are not on the GNU FTP site,
although they're present on sourceware.org?
ftp://sourceware.org/pub/gcc/releases/gcc-4.3.2/
On Tue, 2 Sep 2008, Andrew Pinski wrote:
On Tue, Sep 2, 2008 at 2:15 PM, Tobias Grosser
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
May be you missed to add --with-cloog or --with-ppl to
your ./configure.
Can you send me your config.log file?
I thought we had decided that the build would fail to happen
On Tue, Sep 02, 2008 at 06:15:56PM -0300, Tobias Grosser wrote:
Hi Steve,
On Tue, 2008-09-02 at 13:59 -0700, Steve Kargl wrote:
gfortran.log shows that all the failures are the same. Note I've trimmed
the directory paths:
gfortran.dg/graphite/block-1.f90: In function
On Tue, 2008-09-02 at 14:29 -0700, Steve Kargl wrote:
On Tue, Sep 02, 2008 at 06:15:56PM -0300, Tobias Grosser wrote:
Hi Steve,
On Tue, 2008-09-02 at 13:59 -0700, Steve Kargl wrote:
gfortran.log shows that all the failures are the same. Note I've trimmed
the directory paths:
On Tue, Sep 02, 2008 at 06:38:03PM -0300, Tobias Grosser wrote:
The necessary libraries are described here:
http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/Graphite
Grabbing PPL is fairly easy because a tarball is available.
Cloog OTOH hand is a pain in the ass to obtain bacause I
don't have git installed.
Can
On Tue, 2008-09-02 at 21:23 +, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
On Tue, 2 Sep 2008, Andrew Pinski wrote:
On Tue, Sep 2, 2008 at 2:15 PM, Tobias Grosser
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
May be you missed to add --with-cloog or --with-ppl to
your ./configure.
Can you send me your config.log
Hello!
I'm trying to get a native Ada compiler working on ARM, but have ran
into a few (primarily Makefile) problems.
Before the problem, a little background: I successfully built a cross
compiler to build Ada programs from my laptop (x86_64) to the target
system (Debian ARMEL). My process
On Tue, 2008-09-02 at 14:54 -0700, Janis Johnson wrote:
On Tue, 2008-09-02 at 21:23 +, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
On Tue, 2 Sep 2008, Andrew Pinski wrote:
On Tue, Sep 2, 2008 at 2:15 PM, Tobias Grosser
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
May be you missed to add --with-cloog or --with-ppl
I really do value the build status reports submitted by
others and I go searching for a few results in particular.
People like Joe Buck can be relied upon to post good looking
results for Solaris and thus I need to be able to find those
results easily.
I noticed that the Build status for GCC
On Tue, Sep 02, 2008 at 02:50:36PM -0500, Sebastian Pop wrote:
On Tue, Sep 2, [EMAIL PROTECTED]:00 AM, Jakub Jelinek [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
The trunk is now in stage3 phase, so only bugfixes, documentation changes
and new ports are [EMAIL PROTECTED] point. As an exception the GRAPHITE
On Tue, Sep 02, 2008 at 11:43:46AM +0200, Dominique Dhumieres wrote:
Mail sent by error to [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I get the same error on i686-apple-darwin9 revision 139884.
Dominique
No problem building libobjc in gcc trunk r139919 (with the fix for
PR37293 applied) on i686-apple-darwin9.
--- Comment #2 from domob at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-02 08:51 ---
Subject: Bug 37228
Author: domob
Date: Tue Sep 2 08:50:13 2008
New Revision: 139886
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=139886
Log:
2008-09-01 Jerry DeLisle [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR
--- Comment #2 from domob at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-02 08:51 ---
Subject: Bug 37301
Author: domob
Date: Tue Sep 2 08:50:13 2008
New Revision: 139886
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=139886
Log:
2008-09-01 Jerry DeLisle [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR
--- Comment #3 from jdemeyer at cage dot ugent dot be 2008-09-02 08:52
---
Created an attachment (id=16187)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=16187action=view)
Further testcase simplification
The third testcase uses only rm and =rm constraints, which means that it
--- Comment #6 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-02 09:04 ---
It looks like SCEV does not see that for
(number_of_iterations_in_loop
(analyze_scalar_evolution
(loop_nb = 4)
(scalar = j_3)
(get_scalar_evolution
(scalar = j_3)
(scalar_evolution = ))
--- Comment #7 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-02 09:09 ---
Created an attachment (id=16188)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=16188action=view)
patch
Like with this patch.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37221
--- Comment #30 from rguenther at suse dot de 2008-09-02 09:16 ---
Subject: Re: [4.4 Regression] FAIL:
gcc.c-torture/execute/20040709-1.c execution at -O2 and above
On Mon, 1 Sep 2008, dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca wrote:
--- Comment #29 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia
--- Comment #15 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2008-09-02 09:21 ---
With the patch in comment #14 I am now building libjava. Regtesting scheduled
for tonight (GMT+2).
Note that now objc does not build (see
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2008-09/msg8.html).
Thanks for the patch.
--- Comment #5 from hubicka at ucw dot cz 2008-09-02 10:14 ---
Subject: Re: [4.4 Regression]: gcc.c-torture/execute/931018-1.c int-compare.c
ieee/inf-2.c mzero6.c
Honza, why is tree-inline.c:initialize_cfun not calling
allocate_struct_function and *then* change whatever elements
--- Comment #16 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-02 10:17
---
Created an attachment (id=16189)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=16189action=view)
Simplified preprocessed source
It's still big, but it yields a 353-line assembly file.
Compile with -O2
--- Comment #79 from hp at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-02 10:18 ---
Any news on the hppa testing?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37170
--- Comment #3 from hp at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-02 10:34 ---
Yep, it's revision 139762 that exposed this FAIL, which of course (appears to)
just change behaviour of some optimization levels.
Incidentally, that also exposed some of the FAILs in PR37315
(I think I fumble-fingered
--- Comment #5 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-02 10:34 ---
Fixed.
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #6 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-02 10:35 ---
Subject: Bug 37095
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Sep 2 10:33:46 2008
New Revision: 139887
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=139887
Log:
PR tree-optimization/37095
* cgraph.c
--- Comment #6 from hp at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-02 10:41 ---
(In reply to comment #5)
Well, the code is not mine, but it was wirtten at a time struct_function
did hold a lot of extra stuff.
SVN blamed you for that code in tree-inline.c and the revision range is yours.
The
/home/guerby/build2/gcc/xgcc -c -B/home/guerby/build2/gcc/ -gnatws -O2
-I/home/guerby/build2/gcc/testsuite/ada/acats/support la140211.adb
+===GNAT BUG DETECTED==+
| 4.4.0 20080902 (experimental) [trunk revision 139884]
(x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-02 11:02 ---
The following should fix it. Pre-approved if it passes testing.
Index: tree-sra.c
===
*** tree-sra.c (revision 139886)
--- tree-sra.c (working
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-02 11:33 ---
AIL? I guess another PIC related issue.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-02 11:34 ---
I suppose a regression?
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|FAIL: gcc.dg/utf-array.c|[4.4 Regression] FAIL:
|(test for errors)
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.4.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37323
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|FAIL: |[4.4 Regression] FAIL:
|gfortran.dg/debug/pr35154-
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-02 11:35 ---
There must be a dup for this ...
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37321
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.4.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37320
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.4.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37319
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.4.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37318
--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-02 11:38 ---
It has been committed already.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37318
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Target Milestone|--- |4.4.0
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-02 11:53 ---
I have a patch.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
/lib/gcc/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/4.4.0/include
/n/17/guerby/install2/lib/gcc/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/4.4.0/include-fixed
/usr/include
End of search list.
GNU C (GCC) version 4.4.0 20080902 (experimental) [trunk revision 139884]
(x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu)
compiled by GNU C version 4.1.2
--- Comment #10 from petermorgan at grapevine dot net dot au 2008-09-02
12:11 ---
Subject: Re: gfortran errors in compilation and the making
for upgraded compilers
Dear Guys
Here are the requests that you asked for.
The first run is without any mention of f2c in option names.
It
--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-02 12:23 ---
Ok, try
Index: tree-sra.c
===
*** tree-sra.c (revision 139886)
--- tree-sra.c (working copy)
*** static gimple_seq
*** 2144,2150
--- Comment #8 from tehila at il dot ibm dot com 2008-09-02 12:47 ---
Thank you, Richard!
This patch indeed does the work and unrolls the loop.
The SRA works fine and we get 40% improvement.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37221
--- Comment #4 from laurent at guerby dot net 2008-09-02 13:02 ---
With the second patch I get an ICE during Ada rts build.
+===GNAT BUG DETECTED==+
| 4.4.0 20080902 (experimental) [trunk revision 139884]
(x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
--- Comment #9 from rguenther at suse dot de 2008-09-02 13:10 ---
Subject: Re: Missed early loop-unroll optimization -
causes 40% degradation on SPU
On Tue, 2 Sep 2008, tehila at il dot ibm dot com wrote:
--- Comment #8 from tehila at il dot ibm dot com 2008-09-02 12:47
--- Comment #5 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-02 13:14 ---
up to generate_copy_inout and
call debug_generic_expr (expr)
call debug_generic_expr (t)
call debug_gimple_seq (tmp_seq)
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37328
--- Comment #6 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-02 13:20 ---
Probably the following will fix that...
*** generate_copy_inout (struct sra_elt *elt
*** 2597,2604
t = build2 (COMPLEX_EXPR, elt-type, r, i);
tmp_seq = sra_build_bf_assignment
--- Comment #17 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-02 13:26
---
The offset against %esp should be the same.
Actually it should be adjusted to the value of %esp:
rebuild_cgraph_edges:
pushl %ebp
pushl %edi
pushl %esi
pushl %ebx
$ /usr/lib64/gcc/x86_64-pld-linux/4.3.2/jc1 \
antlr.jar -fhash-synchronization -fno-use-divide-subroutine \
-fuse-boehm-gc -fnon-call-exceptions -fkeep-inline-functions \
-quiet -dumpbase antlr.jar -mtune=generic -auxbase antlr -g0 \
-freduced-reflection
--- Comment #1 from pluto at agmk dot net 2008-09-02 13:33 ---
Created an attachment (id=16190)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=16190action=view)
testcase
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37329
Hi,
My mpfr and gmp 32/64 bits libraries are installed respectively in $PREFIX/lib
and $PREFIX/lib64.
'configure' is called as following:
configure .. --with-gmp-lib=$PREFIX/lib --with-mpfr-lib=$PREFIX/lib ...
It produces a Makefile with the following line:
HOST_GMPLIBS = -L$PREFIX/lib
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-02 13:48 ---
Fixed.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-02 13:49 ---
Subject: Bug 37327
Author: rguenth
Date: Tue Sep 2 13:48:11 2008
New Revision: 139890
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=139890
Log:
2008-09-02 Richard Guenther [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR
--- Comment #1 from schwab at suse dot de 2008-09-02 13:51 ---
Why do you need two flavors? The mfpr/gmp libraries are only used for the
compiler which is only built in one flavor. If you are building for x86-64 you
should configure with $PREFIX/lib64 for both library directories.
--- Comment #80 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2008-09-02
14:06 ---
Subject: Re: [4.4 Regression]: gcc.dg/weak/weak-1.c
Any news on the hppa testing?
I didn't do anything further with the 32-bit port. I did do a
hppa64-hpux11.11 build with your change. I went through
--- Comment #2 from olivier dot raoult at st dot com 2008-09-02 14:12
---
Hmm.. maybe! I tried to script a gcc builder program which shall work on i686,
and on x86_64. Then, for the second, it shall support native 64 and -m32 modes.
As libmpfr and libmgp appear as dynamic libraries, I
--- Comment #22 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-02 14:23 ---
Created an attachment (id=16191)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=16191action=view)
gcc44-pr36766.patch
I don't see tree-ssa-dom.c or tree-ssa-pre.c are at fault here (not guessing
that some basic
output of gcc-my432 -v:
Using built-in specs.
Target: mingw32
Configured with: ../gcc-4.3.2/configure --with-gnu-as --with-gnu-ld
--with-dwarf2 --enable-decimal-float=bid --with-gcc --disable-libgomp
--host=mingw32 --build=mingw32 --target=mingw32 --program-suffix=-my432
--with-arch=pentium3
--- Comment #1 from patriciak784-gccmainling at yahoo dot de 2008-09-02
14:37 ---
Please be aware that compiling /dev/null is used in glibc to produce empty
object files!
So it seems not to be a crazy thing to do...
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37331
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37319
I just tried to compile the Suse Linux package agg-2.5 with the GNU C++
compiler
version 4.4 snapshot 20080829.
The compiler said
distortions.cpp:705: internal compiler error: in make_decl_rtl, at
varasm.c:1297
Please submit a full bug report,
with preprocessed source if appropriate.
See
--- Comment #1 from dcb314 at hotmail dot com 2008-09-02 14:53 ---
Created an attachment (id=16192)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=16192action=view)
C++ source code
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37332
I just tried to compile the Suse Linux package apache2-mod_python-3.3.1-122
with the GNU C compiler version 4.4 snapshot 20080829.
The compiler said
psp_parser.c:1241: internal compiler error: in ira_flattening, at
ira-build.c:2146
Please submit a full bug report,
with preprocessed source if
--- Comment #1 from dcb314 at hotmail dot com 2008-09-02 14:55 ---
Created an attachment (id=16193)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=16193action=view)
C source code
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37333
--- Comment #2 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2008-09-02
14:57 ---
Subject: Re: [4.4 Regression] Visibility test fails
I suppose a regression?
No, the tests are new. I'll have to check the assembly output to
see why they are failing.
Dave
--
--- Comment #1 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-02 15:02 ---
Created an attachment (id=16194)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=16194action=view)
Q
I can believe your comment #5, but I can't believe DW_AT_name is not emitted at
all (just tried it with
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-02 15:15 ---
Reducing.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|
--- Comment #5 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-02 15:16 ---
Fixed.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #6 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-02 15:18 ---
Fixed.
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vmakarov at gcc dot gnu dot
|
--- Comment #2 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2008-09-02 15:30 ---
I can believe your comment #5, but I can't believe DW_AT_name is not emitted
at
all (just tried it with x86_64-linux - i686-darwin9 cross).
I am not sure to understand. If I use egrep with label.*DW_AT_name on
--- Comment #1 from siarhei dot siamashka at gmail dot com 2008-09-02
15:50 ---
Well, looks like it is not a missing feature, but just incompleteness of
documentation :)
It is possible to use double precision floating point registers and NEON
128-bit registers in the following way:
--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-02 15:58 ---
Created an attachment (id=16195)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=16195action=view)
reduced testcase
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37332
--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-02 15:59 ---
Confirmed.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
On Linux/ia32, I got
Executing on host: /export/gnu/import/svn/gcc-test/bld/gcc/xgcc
-B/export/gnu/import/svn/gcc-test/bld/gcc/
/export/gnu/import/svn/gcc-test/src-trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/fastmath-2.c
-O2 -ffast-math -lm -m32 -o ./fastmath-2.exe(timeout = 300)
PASS:
A bootstrap of the trunk failed at stage 2 with the following:
gcc/gcc/../include -I../../gcc/gcc/../libcpp/include -I/usr/local/include
-I/usr/local/include -I../../gcc/gcc/../libdecnumber
-I../../gcc/gcc/../libdecnumber/bid -I../libdecnumber
../../gcc/gcc/objc/objc-act.c -o objcp/objcp-act.o
--- Comment #5 from sam at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-02 16:24 ---
Subject: Bug 37283
Author: sam
Date: Tue Sep 2 16:23:29 2008
New Revision: 139892
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=139892
Log:
gcc/
PR target/37283
* opts.c (decode_options):
--- Comment #6 from sam at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-02 16:25 ---
This is fixed in SVN trunk.
--
sam at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2008-09-02
16:25 ---
Subject: Re: [4.4 Regression] Visibility test fails
No, the tests are new. I'll have to check the assembly output to
see why they are failing.
Checked visibility-14.c. The .hidden directive is not
--- Comment #3 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-02 16:44 ---
Why got this even marked as regression? GCC 4.3.1 didn't support
-ftree-loop-distribution, it is a new option, so it can't regress.
The loop in question is:
bb 8:
# state_89 = PHI state_17(9), state_5(7)
#
--- Comment #11 from sgk at troutmask dot apl dot washington dot edu
2008-09-02 16:57 ---
Subject: Re: gfortran errors in compilation and the making for upgraded
compilers
On Tue, Sep 02, 2008 at 12:11:23PM -, petermorgan at grapevine dot net dot
au wrote:
gfortran -O
Derived-type finalization as defined in Fortran 2003 is at the moment partially
implemented in gfortran. FINAL bindings are parsed and stored/loaded in .mod
module files, but finalizers are not yet executed and a not-yet-implemented
error appears on using FINAL.
--
Summary: Fortran
--
domob at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37336
1 - 100 of 188 matches
Mail list logo