On Wed, 2005-04-20 at 01:18, Josh Conner wrote:
On Apr 18, 2005, at 3:12 PM, Julian Brown wrote:
Results for arm-none-elf, cross-compiled from i686-pc-linux-gnu
(Debian)
for C and C++ are here:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2005-04/msg01301.html
Relative to RC1, there are
Per Bothner writes:
Andrew Haley wrote:
However, these fields are real, and they are used, but we shouldn't
output any debug info for them.
Does Dwarf support computed field offsets? (This might be needed
for Ada, to.) If so, the Right Thing might be to emit DIEs so gdb
can
Mark Mitchell [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
RC2 is available here:
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/prerelease-4.0.0-20050417/
As before, I'd very much appreciate it if people would test these bits
on primary and secondary platforms, post test results with the
contrib/test_summary script, and send
commented onMark Mitchell wrote:
The changes that I anticipate between now and the final release are
(a) documentation changes, (b) a patch for 20991, and (c) a possible
patch for 20973. Other than that, I will only consider patches that
fix egregious problems, like a fail to bootstrap on a
Geoffrey Keating writes:
Mark Mitchell [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
RC2 is available here:
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/prerelease-4.0.0-20050417/
As before, I'd very much appreciate it if people would test these bits
on primary and secondary platforms, post test results with
Results for i686-pc-cygwin (c, c++, gfortran, objc) are here:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2005-04/msg01363.html
No regressions for c, c++, gfortran relative to RC1.
There are several new tests, which all pass, and one less failed test in
libstdc++:
Richard Sandiford wrote:
Results for mips-elf are here:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2005-04/msg01331.html
and look good. No regressions.
Thanks; added to the Wiki.
--
Mark Mitchell
CodeSourcery, LLC
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(916) 791-8304
James E Wilson wrote:
commented onMark Mitchell wrote:
The changes that I anticipate between now and the final release are
(a) documentation changes, (b) a patch for 20991, and (c) a possible
patch for 20973. Other than that, I will only consider patches that
fix egregious problems, like a fail
Geoffrey Keating wrote:
Mark Mitchell [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
RC2 is available here:
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/prerelease-4.0.0-20050417/
As before, I'd very much appreciate it if people would test these bits
on primary and secondary platforms, post test results with the
contrib/test_summary
Eric Botcazou wrote:
SPARC/Solaris is OK:
Thanks; I've added your information to the Wiki.
--
Mark Mitchell
CodeSourcery, LLC
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(916) 791-8304
Mark Mitchell writes:
Andrew Haley wrote:
Geoffrey Keating writes:
Mark Mitchell [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
RC2 is available here:
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/prerelease-4.0.0-20050417/
As before, I'd very much appreciate it if people would test these
Joe Buck wrote:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2005-04/msg01307.html
Thanks.
For sparc-sun-solaris2.8, I get a failure when building the Java compiler,
but I may be doing something wrong, as I usually avoid the Java build
on Solaris (since it takes most of a day to build and test).
Thanks.
On Tue, Apr 19, 2005 at 08:12:05AM +0200, Eric Botcazou wrote:
For sparc-sun-solaris2.8, I get a failure when building the Java compiler,
but I may be doing something wrong, as I usually avoid the Java build
on Solaris (since it takes most of a day to build and test).
Known glitch. You
Andrew Haley wrote:
Do you mean running through the struct removing such fields from the
list? OK, I can do that.
Yes.
So, I would suggest fixing this in the Java front end.
I'll see if I can find the C++ front end code you refer to and use it
as a reference.
Look in class.c for
On Tue, Apr 19, 2005 at 04:20:19PM +, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
On Mon, 18 Apr 2005, Joe Buck wrote:
It appears the bug is because there's a libiconv.so in /usr/local/lib on
that machine, with headers in /usr/local/include, but /usr/local/lib isn't
in my LD_LIBRARY_PATH. configure finds
Andrew Haley writes:
Mark Mitchell writes:
The C++ front-end (and probably the C front-end) strips
zero-width (and possibly unnamed) bitfields after class layout.
This can be justified in that those bitfields only affect
layout; one doesn't need the middle-end to copy them
Andrew == Andrew Haley [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Andrew At compile time we don't know the field offset of fields that we
Andrew inherit, because it can change at runtime. So, we don't set the
Andrew FIELD_OFFSET, and that is is why dbxout is aborting.
Andrew All I want is for FIELD_OFFSET to
Yes, you sent me a message before when I couldn't build at all, which I
applied, but you pointed me to a different patch:
I was talking about a second message.
If an additional patch is needed, install/specific.html should be updated,
and perhaps a single patch that does the whole job should
On Tue, Apr 19, 2005 at 09:23:17PM +0200, Eric Botcazou wrote:
Yes, you sent me a message before when I couldn't build at all, which I
applied, but you pointed me to a different patch:
I was talking about a second message.
I don't recall seeing it, but then I get a lot of mail. Sorry if I
Andrew Haley wrote:
At compile time we don't know the field offset of fields that we
inherit, because it can change at runtime. So, we don't set the
FIELD_OFFSET, and that is is why dbxout is aborting.
OK. I certainly can't claim that this aspect of the GCC IR is
particularly well specified.
On Apr 18, 2005, at 3:12 PM, Julian Brown wrote:
Results for arm-none-elf, cross-compiled from i686-pc-linux-gnu
(Debian)
for C and C++ are here:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2005-04/msg01301.html
Relative to RC1, there are several new tests which pass, and:
g++.dg/warn/Wdtor1.C (test
Andrew Haley wrote:
However, these fields are real, and they are used, but we shouldn't
output any debug info for them.
Does Dwarf support computed field offsets? (This might be needed
for Ada, to.) If so, the Right Thing might be to emit DIEs so gdb
can calculate the field offsets, mimicing the
On 19/04/2005, at 6:24 AM, Andrew Haley wrote:
Geoffrey Keating writes:
Mark Mitchell [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
RC2 is available here:
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/prerelease-4.0.0-20050417/
As before, I'd very much appreciate it if people would test these
bits
on primary and secondary platforms,
RC2 is available here:
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/prerelease-4.0.0-20050417/
As before, I'd very much appreciate it if people would test these bits
on primary and secondary platforms, post test results with the
contrib/test_summary script, and send me a message saying whether or
not there are
On Mon, Apr 18, 2005 at 07:44:03AM -0700, Mark Mitchell wrote:
RC2 is available here:
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/prerelease-4.0.0-20050417/
As before, I'd very much appreciate it if people would test these bits
on primary and secondary platforms, post test results with the
c,ada are clean on x86 and x86_64 linux.
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2005-04/msg01311.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2005-04/msg01313.html
Laurent
On 2005-04-18, Mark Mitchell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
RC2 is available here:
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/prerelease-4.0.0-20050417/
As before, I'd very much appreciate it if people would test these bits
on primary and secondary platforms, post test results with the
contrib/test_summary
Joe For sparc-sun-solaris2.8, I get a failure when building the Java
compiler,
Joe but I may be doing something wrong, as I usually avoid the Java build
Joe on Solaris (since it takes most of a day to build and test). The message
Joe is
Joe java/parse.o(.text+0x16cc): In function
28 matches
Mail list logo
