--- Comment #2 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-10-30 08:01 ---
Subject: Bug 29637
Author: jakub
Date: Mon Oct 30 08:01:28 2006
New Revision: 118175
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=118175
Log:
PR tree-optimization/29637
* tree.c
--- Comment #3 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-10-30 08:04 ---
Subject: Bug 29637
Author: jakub
Date: Mon Oct 30 08:03:50 2006
New Revision: 118176
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=118176
Log:
PR tree-optimization/29637
* tree.c
--- Comment #4 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-10-30 08:05 ---
Subject: Bug 29637
Author: jakub
Date: Mon Oct 30 08:04:58 2006
New Revision: 118177
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=118177
Log:
PR tree-optimization/29637
* tree.c
--- Comment #5 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-10-30 08:08 ---
Subject: Bug 29637
Author: jakub
Date: Mon Oct 30 08:08:41 2006
New Revision: 118178
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=118178
Log:
PR tree-optimization/29637
* tree.c
--- Comment #6 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-10-30 08:10 ---
Oops, sorry for the dup.
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #7 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-10-30 08:10 ---
Fixed now in SVN.
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-10-30 08:11 ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 29637 ***
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #8 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-10-30 08:11 ---
*** Bug 29638 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29637
--- Comment #4 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-10-30 08:30
---
(In reply to comment #3)
real c
if (loc(c) == 0) call abort
end
This one has been fixed on mainline.
--
fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #4 from oder at eleks dot lviv dot ua 2006-10-30 08:33 ---
Created an attachment (id=12509)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=12509action=view)
Compilable testcase
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29582
--
oder at eleks dot lviv dot ua changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29582
--- Comment #22 from law at redhat dot com 2006-10-30 09:04 ---
Subject: Re: [4.2/4.3 regression] ACATS c35507m cd2a23e
cxh1001 fail
On Sun, 2006-10-29 at 23:17 +, ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org
wrote:
--- Comment #21 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org
PR28959 fix causes a regression:
module A
type :: T
integer :: u
end type T
end module A
module B
contains
function foo()
use A
type(T), pointer :: foo
nullify (foo)
end function foo
end module B
subroutine bar()
--- Comment #23 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-10-30 09:21
---
Maybe so, but that would most likely be by accident, not by design. In
fact, that probably indicates an optimization regression in the recent
changes to VRP.
No disagreement, I was merely updating the
This is already supported by a large number of compilers (e.g. sunf95, NAG f95,
ifort, g95).
gfortran gives: Syntax error in data declaration
Example:
subroutine foo(i)
implicit none
integer, value :: i
print *, i
end subroutine foo
From the Fortran 2003 standard:
5.1.2.15 VALUE attribute
Supported by, e.g., ifort and sunf95. (Not yet by g95 and NAG f95.)
Example:
--
module test
implicit none
real,parameter :: pi = 3.1415926535897932385
end module test
program usetest
use :: test, mypi = pi
real :: pi
pi = 3.0
print *, mypi, pi ! Shall print
--- Comment #5 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-10-30 09:57
---
What is the command line to run only one test in the libstdc++ testsuite?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29639
Compilation of the program below produces:
/tmp/cclEBTTX.o(.gnu.linkonce.t._ZN1XC1Eb+0x1a): In function
`X::X[in-charge](bool)':
: undefined reference to `X::a'
/tmp/cclEBTTX.o(.gnu.linkonce.t._ZN1XC1Eb+0x24): In function
`X::X[in-charge](bool)':
: undefined reference to `X::b'
collect2: ld
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-10-30 11:05 ---
You need to provide a definition of X::a and X::b.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-10-30 11:09 ---
Thanks, Jakub. The obvious patch will regtest, just as soon as I update
mpfr
I will submit it as 'obvious'
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
Compilation of the program below produces:
/tmp/cclEBTTX.o(.gnu.linkonce.t._ZN1XC1Eb+0x1a): In function
`X::X[in-charge](bool)':
: undefined reference to `X::a'
/tmp/cclEBTTX.o(.gnu.linkonce.t._ZN1XC1Eb+0x24): In function
`X::X[in-charge](bool)':
: undefined reference to `X::b'
collect2: ld
Compilation of the program below produces:
/tmp/cclEBTTX.o(.gnu.linkonce.t._ZN1XC1Eb+0x1a): In function
`X::X[in-charge](bool)':
: undefined reference to `X::a'
/tmp/cclEBTTX.o(.gnu.linkonce.t._ZN1XC1Eb+0x24): In function
`X::X[in-charge](bool)':
: undefined reference to `X::b'
collect2: ld
--- Comment #3 from irar at il dot ibm dot com 2006-10-30 11:33 ---
I am getting another failure:
/home/irar/main-boot/build7/./gcc/xgcc -B/home/irar/main-boot/build7/./gcc/
-B/home/irar/main-boot/ppc64-redhat-linux/bin/
-B/home/irar/main-boot/ppc64-redhat-linux/lib/ -isystem
--- Comment #9 from P dot Schaffnit at access dot rwth-aachen dot de
2006-10-30 11:38 ---
Sorry it took me so long, but I had clobbered my objects (...), and then I
tried to post it, but somehow it doesn't show: sorry if comes twice...
I would guess it's not obviously wrong
--- Comment #2 from christian dot heinlein at uni-ulm dot de 2006-10-30
11:38 ---
No! A static const int member which is only used as a compile time constant
does not need a definition, if I understand the C++ standard correctly.
(And in most cases, the code produced by GCC actually
--- Comment #3 from christian dot heinlein at uni-ulm dot de 2006-10-30
11:41 ---
*** Bug 29646 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29645
--- Comment #1 from christian dot heinlein at uni-ulm dot de 2006-10-30
11:41 ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 29645 ***
--
christian dot heinlein at uni-ulm dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
As can be found at http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2005-07/msg00286.html
GFortran doesn't do inlining: unfortunately I cannot do it, and I don't know
how hard this would be, but this would certainly help a lot with several codes
I know...
--
Summary: Inline
Product: gcc
--- Comment #1 from christian dot heinlein at uni-ulm dot de 2006-10-30
11:43 ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 29645 ***
--
christian dot heinlein at uni-ulm dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #4 from christian dot heinlein at uni-ulm dot de 2006-10-30
11:43 ---
*** Bug 29647 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29645
--- Comment #6 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2006-10-30 11:48 ---
(In reply to comment #5)
What is the command line to run only one test in the libstdc++ testsuite?
I'm reluctant to tell you in public, because certainly there are *far* better
ways, but was I usually do when I'm in a
--- Comment #7 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2006-10-30 11:52 ---
(In reply to comment #6)
... the complete command line from the ChangeLog.
Of course read it 'libstdc++.log', sorry.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29639
--- Comment #8 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-10-30 12:02
---
I'm reluctant to tell you in public, because certainly there are *far* better
ways, but was I usually do when I'm in a hurry, I simply go inside the
libstdc++-v3/testsuite directory, set the LD_LIBRARY_PATH
--- Comment #9 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2006-10-30 12:05 ---
(In reply to comment #8)
The idea was precisely to avoid running the whole testsuite. :-)
Oh, well, once in a while you *must* di that, right? ;) Just save somewhere
libstdc++.log...
--
--- Comment #1 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-10-30 12:16
---
The rename-list works, it's only the F2003 USE :: that prevents it in your
example. This is already tracked by PR 25707, and I submitted a patch to fix
this (see
--- Comment #4 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-10-30 12:16
---
*** Bug 29643 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-10-30 12:18
---
Once my patch for pre-compiled intrinsic modules is reviewed (which should be
soon) and when ISO_C_BINDING is integrated (which might take a little longer),
it will be almost trivial to integrate your module in
Running an application I got the following error
Fortran runtime error: Attempt to allocate negative amount of memory. Possible
integer overflow
This is not very helpful in debugging, as it gives no clue as to where in the
code it occurred. It would be extremely helpful to have a way to force a
--
fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot
|dot org
--- Comment #1 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-10-30 12:24
---
I think it's better to file it with the library.
--
fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-10-30 12:28 ---
*** Bug 29645 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-10-30 12:28 ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 25220 ***
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-10-30 12:28 ---
Reopen ...
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-10-30 12:29 ---
to mark as dup of PR25220
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 25220 ***
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-10-30 12:29 ---
*** Bug 29483 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from P dot Schaffnit at access dot rwth-aachen dot de
2006-10-30 12:29 ---
I think a '-traceback' would be a very nice enhancement! (as you could then
have the likes of 'ERRTRA' from Lahey or 'TRACEBACKQQ' from Compaq, I forgot
how it translates with Intel...)
--
P
Using built-in specs.
Target: i486-linux-gnu
Configured with: ../src/configure -v
--enable-languages=c,c++,fortran,objc,obj-c++,treelang --prefix=/usr
--enable-shared --with-system-zlib --libexecdir=/usr/lib
--without-included-gettext --enable-threads=posix --enable-nls
--program-suffix=-4.1
--- Comment #8 from dir at lanl dot gov 2006-10-30 13:58 ---
Fixing the errors that are shown above is trivial - so I assume that they are
just the first of a cascade of errors in trying to fix the problem. Having a
shared libgcc is Ok - the real problem is distributing version of
--- Comment #1 from info at wolfsohn-software dot de 2006-10-30 14:00
---
Created an attachment (id=12512)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=12512action=view)
preprocessor output
as requested from compiler
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29650
--- Comment #5 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-10-30 14:17 ---
Subject: Bug 29452
Author: burnus
Date: Mon Oct 30 14:17:15 2006
New Revision: 118184
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=118184
Log:
fortran/
2006-10-26 Tobias Burnus [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--- Comment #6 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-10-30 14:19 ---
Accept bug
--
burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #7 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-10-30 14:21 ---
And mark as fixed.
Hopefully, we won't forget to add checks also to the following specifiers as
soon as we implement them.
WRITE/READ (some only in READ allowed; those are not yet implemented in
gfortran):
-
--- Comment #8 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-10-30 14:24
---
(In reply to comment #7)
- ASYNCHRONOUS: 'YES', 'NO'
- BLANK: 'NULL', 'ZERO'
- DECIMAL: 'COMMA', 'POINT'
- DELIM: 'APOSTROPHE', 'QUOTE', 'NONE
- PAD: 'YES', 'NO'
- ROUND: 'UP', 'DOWN', 'ZERO', 'NEAREST',
--- Comment #10 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-10-30 14:49
---
Oh, well, once in a while you *must* di that, right? ;)
Only under duress. :-) Bug confirmed with Binutils 2.17 20061003 on x86.
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #11 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-10-30 14:50
---
Investigating.
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
GCC target triplet|sh4-unknown-linux-gnu, |sh4-unknown-linux, i686-pc-
--- Comment #12 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2006-10-30 14:53 ---
Thanks Eric.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29639
implicit none
integer :: i1,i2
integer(2) :: status2
integer(4) :: status4
i1 = 0; i2 = 0
call signal(i1, i2, status4)
print *,status4
call signal(i1, i2, status2)
print *,status2
end
Dumped tree shows:
{
int4 D.1330;
D.1330 = (int4) status2;
Configured with: ../../svn/gcc/configure --prefix=$(localpath) --disable-nls
--enable-threads=posix --enable-shared --enable-bootstrap --with-system-zlib
--program-suffix=-svn --enable-languages=c,c++,fortran
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.3.0 20061030 (experimental)
--
Summary
Building with
/usr/local/gcc-4.1.1/bin/g++ -ftemplate-depth-128 -O0 -fno-inline -Wall
-g --save-temps -DBOOST_ALL_NO_LIB=1 -I../../..
-I/home/ericne/boost/cvs/boost -c -o
C:\cygwin\home\ericne\boost\cvs\boost\bin.v2\libs\xpressive\scratch\gcc-4.1\debug\main.o
main.cpp
Error:
--- Comment #1 from eric dot niebler at gmail dot com 2006-10-30 15:42
---
Created an attachment (id=12513)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=12513action=view)
preprocessed input file
preprocessed input file, compressed because of file size restrictions
--
--- Comment #9 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-10-30 16:01
---
Bug in biv selection, so strength reduction messes up:
Loop from 45 to 46: 12 real insns.
Biv 60: insn 19 const (reg 59 [ pretmp.26 ])
Biv 60: insn 22 const (1)
Biv 60: verified
Biv 60: initialized at
--- Comment #1 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-10-30 16:11 ---
This is caused by the stack realignment in i?86 main, the way it is currently
implemented is that address of first argument is loaded into %ecx and
then the stack is realigned. The pseudo register which shows in the
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-10-30 16:14 ---
works for me with gcc (GCC) 4.1.2 20061024 (prerelease) (SUSE Linux).
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29650
--- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-10-30 16:15 ---
Subject: Bug 29410
Author: pinskia
Date: Mon Oct 30 16:15:09 2006
New Revision: 118186
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=118186
Log:
2006-10-30 Andrew Pinski [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR
--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-10-30 16:16 ---
Btw, you should report this to Ubuntu/Debian instead.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-10-30 16:24 ---
Reducing ...
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
--- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-10-30 16:31 ---
(In reply to comment #2)
works for me with gcc (GCC) 4.1.2 20061024 (prerelease) (SUSE Linux).
Fails with me: 4.1.2 20061014
So reducing ...
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What
--- Comment #5 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-10-30 16:45 ---
Reduced testcase:
int main(void)
{
{ static union { } u; }
}
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29650
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Known to fail|
--- Comment #17 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-10-30 16:46
---
The following patch fixes the problem:
Index: data.c
===
--- data.c (revision 118134)
+++ data.c (working copy)
@@ -155,7 +155,8 @@
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
Last
--- Comment #6 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-10-30 17:02 ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 26881 ***
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #25 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-10-30 17:02
---
*** Bug 29650 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #13 from again at gmx dot de 2006-10-30 17:12 ---
(In reply to comment #11)
I believe the testcase is invalid.
You're right, therefore I'm closing this bug. The author of the Boost.Lambda
library, Jaakko Järvi, kindly pointed my to a section of the library
documentation,
--- Comment #14 from again at gmx dot de 2006-10-30 17:26 ---
However, my initial testcase (attachment #12493) does still not compile, so it
seems I have simplified it wrongly. I will check this back and reopen the bug
accordingly.
--
I'm starting with gcc 4.1.1 (as bundled in FC6) on a Dell Latitude D800.
Want to build gcc cross compiler for armv4tl to build a new for arm machine.
Downloaded binutils-2.17 distribution.
configured binutils with
configure --prefix=$HOME/usr/local --target=arm-linux-elf
then did make followed by
--- Comment #9 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-10-30 18:23 ---
Subject: Bug 29452
Author: burnus
Date: Mon Oct 30 18:22:47 2006
New Revision: 118191
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=118191
Log:
fortran/
2006-10-30 Tobias Burnus [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--- Comment #26 from sur at compart dot net 2006-10-30 18:23 ---
It seemed too difficult and risky to me to resolve the numerous rejects of the
attached patch against the 4.1.1 release, so I checked out today via svn the
4.1 branch in current state (30.10.2006). After changing a mask in
--- Comment #1 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2006-10-30 18:44 ---
libstdc++/26810 again?
Anyway, not being a cross-build expert, a line that does not make sense in
those outputs is the following:
...
checking for ld that supports -Wl,-z,relro... yes
...
That is
%uname -a
FreeBSD wacko 6.1-RELEASE-p10 FreeBSD 6.1-RELEASE-p10 #0: Fri Oct 27 03:12:39
CDT 2006 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/WACKO i386
While playing with cc for linking apps, i came across this gem. Whether or not
my command line usage is right (which it probabaly isn't being
When I run make install on current 4.2 sources on Solaris 10 x86, I get:
if [ x != x ] ; then \
/u01/var/tmp/gcc_4.2_svn/gcc/install-sh -c /bin/sh
/u01/var/tmp/gcc_4.2_svn/gcc/gcc/../mkinstalldirs \
/opt/gcc-4.2/libexec/gcc/i386-pc-solaris2.10/4.2.0/install-tools/mkinstalldirs
; \
--- Comment #2 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2006-10-30 19:12 ---
In general, I would also suggest:
http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/Building_Cross_Toolchains_with_gcc
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29654
gfortran happily accepts the SAVE attribute for function (procedure attributes)
function sq(x)
real, intent(in) :: x
real, save :: sq ! SAVE is wrong!
sq = x**2
end function sq
g95:
Error: PROCEDURE attribute conflicts with SAVE attribute at (1)
sunf95:
ERROR: SQ is a function, therefore
--- Comment #1 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-10-30 19:31 ---
A fix for this specific problem is below. But one should check whether there
are other things related to procedures/subroutines/functions which are be
prohibited and should be checked. (Thus not assigning to myself.)
c++ -o nsINIParser.o -c -I../../dist/include/system_wrappers -include
../../config/gcc_hidden.h -DOSTYPE=\Linux2.6.19-0.rc1\ -DOSARCH=\Linux\
-DBUILD_ID=00 -I./../build -I../../dist/include/string
-I../../dist/include/xpcom -I../../dist/include -I../../dist/include/nspr
--- Comment #4 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-10-30 19:39
---
This patch is OK.
Vlad, would you please check it in, unless someone else beats you to it?
Thanks!
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28400
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-10-30 19:40 ---
I think this is a dup of bug 29016.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29658
--- Comment #2 from bero at arklinux dot org 2006-10-30 19:43 ---
Created an attachment (id=12514)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=12514action=view)
Preprocessed source
Attaching preprocessed source.
This happened with svn rev. 118139; bug 29016 was reported fixed
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-10-30 19:46 ---
It wowkrs just fine iwth 4.3.0 20061026.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29658
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-10-30 19:50 ---
You should be building newlib before building libstdc++.
Anyways this is not a bug.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-10-30 20:01 ---
cc: Internal error: Segmentation fault: 11 (program ld)
Please submit a full bug report.
See URL:http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.html for instructions.
Even though it says to report this to GCC, this really should be
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-10-30 20:03 ---
How did you configure GCC?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29656
--- Comment #2 from brett dot albertson at stratech dot com 2006-10-30
20:15 ---
(In reply to comment #1)
How did you configure GCC?
I figured it out. I have been using /bin/bash as my shell and not setting
CONFIG_SHELL for the past year. It has been working until now, but
--- Comment #24 from ghazi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-10-30 20:22 ---
Subject: Bug 29335
Author: ghazi
Date: Mon Oct 30 20:21:59 2006
New Revision: 118200
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=118200
Log:
PR middle-end/29335
* builtins.c
--- Comment #1 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-10-30 21:23 ---
Taking this bug.
--
burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-10-30 21:27 ---
Tobias,
A fix for this specific problem is below. But one should check whether there
are other things related to procedures/subroutines/functions which are be
prohibited and should be checked. (Thus not assigning
--- Comment #9 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-10-30 21:34 ---
Steve and Jerry,
laptop:kargl[209] f95 -o z t.f90
Error: t.f90, line 3: Element no. 13 of object A already initialised
Errors in declarations, no further processing for $main$
[f95 error termination]
The
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |pault at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org
--- Comment #3 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-10-30 21:59 ---
Taking the bug.
--
burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
1 - 100 of 144 matches
Mail list logo
