http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60578
--- Comment #3 from Zhendong Su su at cs dot ucdavis.edu ---
(because (c ^ 0L) -1 is true in 64-bit, so the code returns)
Or perhaps not, as -1 should actually be promoted to signed long, so the
comparison becomes 0L -1L, and is thus false and
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60578
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
But why do you think (c ^ 0L) -1 is 1 for 64-bit mode?
From C99, 6.3.1.8, different paragraphs apply:
Otherwise, if the type of the operand with signed integer type can represent
all
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60578
--- Comment #5 from Zhendong Su su at cs dot ucdavis.edu ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #4)
But why do you think (c ^ 0L) -1 is 1 for 64-bit mode?
From C99, 6.3.1.8, different paragraphs apply:
Otherwise, if the type of the
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54733
Thomas Preud'homme thomas.preudhomme at arm dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60572
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60572
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 32386
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=32386action=edit
gcc49-pr60572.patch
Untested fix. Whether you want to fix it this way not sure.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60571
--- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Mar 19 07:18:46 2014
New Revision: 208675
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=208675root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR lto/60571
* lto.c (wait_for_child): Define
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60571
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60054
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60332
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59114
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60579
Bug ID: 60579
Summary: Segmentation fault on variadic 'using' within variadic
template class
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60566
--- Comment #1 from Markus Trippelsdorf trippels at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 32387
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=32387action=edit
unreduced testcase
I've narrowed it down to a single file. Can't say I understand
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60566
--- Comment #2 from Markus Trippelsdorf trippels at gcc dot gnu.org ---
--- part_good.s 2014-03-19 08:57:10.100342064 +0100
+++ part_bad.s 2014-03-19 08:56:50.134141664 +0100
@@ -13466,49 +13466,10 @@
.text
.LHOTE151:
.section
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60579
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60580
Bug ID: 60580
Summary: aarch64 generates wrong code for __attribute__
((optimize(no-omit-frame-pointer)))
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.3
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60569
Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60569
Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54561
--- Comment #4 from Mikael Pettersson mikpelinux at gmail dot com ---
(In reply to Matthieu Patou from comment #3)
volatile proto_tree *tmptree = NULL;
Try
proto_tree * volatile tmptree = NULL;
It's the variable itself that needs to be
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60566
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60581
Bug ID: 60581
Summary: gcc doesn't isssue a strict aliasing warning on a code
that seems to break it
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.3
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60559
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Mar 19 09:13:32 2014
New Revision: 208676
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=208676root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/60559
*
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59543
--- Comment #10 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Wed Mar 19 09:22:15 2014
New Revision: 208677
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=208677root=gccview=rev
Log:
2014-03-19 Richard Biener rguent...@suse.de
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60582
Bug ID: 60582
Summary: gfortran.dg/fmt_en.f90 FAILs on Solaris 9/x86
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59543
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60582
Rainer Orth ro at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.9.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60128
--- Comment #26 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ro at CeBiTec dot
Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
--- Comment #24 from Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr ---
Rainer,
can you test the following patch?
---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60128
--- Comment #27 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ro at CeBiTec dot
Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
--- Comment #25 from Jerry DeLisle jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #21)
We can xfail the test case
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54316
--- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org ---
That would be very welcome, thanks, Howard.
We hope to complete the C++11 library for the next major release after 4.9, but
there's still quite a lot to do. I haven't even analysed
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60576
--- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
I can't reproduce it, in any case, this seems to have been broken before as
well
and starting with 208668 I get valgrind error about memcpy with overlapping
arguments.
The bug seems
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60576
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.9.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60569
--- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org ---
struct A
{
void foo ();
struct
{
int i;
void bar () { i = 0; }
} s;
};
void A::foo () { s.bar (); }
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60574
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60572
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60581
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||alias,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60577
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60576
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
at's dim array is created by:
#6 0x006fc242 in gfc_get_array_descriptor_base (dimen=2, codimen=0,
restricted=true, akind=GFC_ARRAY_ALLOCATABLE)
at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60419
--- Comment #11 from Martin Jambor jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Good job reducing the testcase to something this small!
Anyway, Jakub's analysis of what is going on is still correct and all
the high level decisions that we do are IMHO correct
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60577
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nathan at acm
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57703
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org ---
This is just totally broken and not supportable with LTO. We'd need to amend
toplevel asm syntax to list defined and used symbols, but that doesn't fix
existing uses.
The proper
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60583
Bug ID: 60583
Summary: Garbled data, temporary bound ... only persists until
the constructor exits, fine with clang++
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60567
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60577
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org ---
So - if we delay marking any decl addressable during IPA reference recording
then we need an IPA pass that computes whether any of the taken IPA_REF_ADDR
may leak into the IL. We
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60584
Bug ID: 60584
Summary: std::vector::emplace_back(...) use move constructor
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60584
--- Comment #1 from Ruslan Mullakhmetov ruslan at mullakh dot com ---
Created attachment 32391
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=32391action=edit
compiler output
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60577
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #3)
Which leaves the possibility of more cleverly instrumenting the program
in the first place ...
Which shouldn't be so hard as we are
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60585
Bug ID: 60585
Summary: Virtual function related memory access errors with
multiple virtual inheritance
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60567
--- Comment #2 from Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1)
Works for me - any more specifics? Host/target?
gcc version 4.9.0 20140319, r208679.
Target: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
CentOS 6.5, glibc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60569
--- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: mpolacek
Date: Wed Mar 19 12:25:04 2014
New Revision: 208681
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=208681root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR sanitizer/60569
* ubsan.c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60569
Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60577
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 32393
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=32393action=edit
hack
Like this (hack alert). Applies store motion one level for a restricted set
of
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60586
Bug ID: 60586
Summary: [Cilk+] Parameters evaluation happens inside spawn
worker
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60580
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60553
--- Comment #8 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org ---
I've posted the patches but I'm curious if the 2nd change alone helps enough.
The first is somewhat handwaving (because we also have type_non_common which
breaks the argument of
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60583
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60549
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60583
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org ---
As this is DR1288 it's a dup of PR50025
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50025
--- Comment #22 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org ---
For the record, I think r207164 fixed this
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60559
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60583
--- Comment #3 from andreaskem at web dot de ---
Thank you.
I looked around but did not find those reports. Sorry for that.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60584
Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59749
Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60585
Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60587
Bug ID: 60587
Summary: debug-mode -std=c++11 vector::insert(pos, begin, end)
dereferences begin too eagerly
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60588
Bug ID: 60588
Summary: AVR target does not support init_priority attribute
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60566
--- Comment #3 from Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Markus Trippelsdorf from comment #2)
--- part_good.s 2014-03-19 08:57:10.100342064 +0100
+++ part_bad.s 2014-03-19 08:56:50.134141664 +0100
- .quad
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59749
--- Comment #4 from Martin Husemann martin at netbsd dot org ---
Yes - I'm still trying to reduce it to a reasonable test case, but in general
it works - so I am confused big time.
Also Julio (the ATF author) claims the same test works on FreeBSD
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60589
Bug ID: 60589
Summary: Parallel install fails
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: other
Assignee:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60590
Bug ID: 60590
Summary: Can't recreate the same executable in testsuite
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60589
Yury Gribov y.gribov at samsung dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||y.gribov at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54316
--- Comment #8 from Howard Hinnant howard.hinnant at gmail dot com ---
Here:
http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2005/n1862.html#27.4.4%20-%20Class%20template%20basic_ios
is a good list of what needs to be done. It is an old
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60566
--- Comment #4 from Markus Trippelsdorf trippels at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Jason Merrill from comment #3)
(In reply to Markus Trippelsdorf from comment #2)
--- part_good.s 2014-03-19 08:57:10.100342064 +0100
+++ part_bad.s
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60332
--- Comment #3 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com ---
I'm adding it to the testsuite.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60576
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.9.0 |4.8.3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60553
--- Comment #9 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Wed Mar 19 15:37:28 2014
New Revision: 208682
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=208682root=gccview=rev
Log:
2014-03-19 Richard Biener rguent...@suse.de
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60566
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Markus Trippelsdorf from comment #4)
If I compile part.cpp with a compiler _after_ r208573 and link the
library and install it, Okular shows a popup Unable to find the
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60566
--- Comment #6 from Markus Trippelsdorf trippels at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Looking at the library, the only difference are four additional
symbols in the good version:
_ZThn16_N6KParts13ReadWritePartD0Ev
_ZThn16_N6KParts13ReadWritePartD1Ev
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60587
Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60591
Bug ID: 60591
Summary: Report enum conversions as part of Wconversion
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60332
--- Comment #4 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org paolo at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: paolo
Date: Wed Mar 19 15:48:39 2014
New Revision: 208684
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=208684root=gccview=rev
Log:
2014-03-19 Paolo Carlini
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60133
mshawcroft at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60566
--- Comment #7 from Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Markus Trippelsdorf from comment #4)
part.ii is part of a library called libkparts.so.4.12.3.
When I compile part.cpp with a compiler before r208573 and link the
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60568
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60553
--- Comment #10 from Martin Liška marxin.liska at gmail dot com ---
Second part of suggested patch is sufficient.
ps auxf:
marxin 20293 0.0 0.0 8604 1200 pts/0S17:27 0:00 | \_
c++ -Wl,-z,now -Wl,-z,relro -pthread
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60590
--- Comment #2 from hjl at gcc dot gnu.org hjl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: hjl
Date: Wed Mar 19 16:59:18 2014
New Revision: 208685
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=208685root=gccview=rev
Log:
Log environment variables in
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60590
H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60556
--- Comment #14 from reed kotler reed.kotler at imgtec dot com ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #13)
(In reply to reed kotler from comment #12)
Do you know where the original line was that made it fail in the .ii?
Yes:
# 227
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60556
--- Comment #15 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com ---
This is related to PR 54037.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60566
--- Comment #8 from Markus Trippelsdorf trippels at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Jason Merrill from comment #7)
(In reply to Markus Trippelsdorf from comment #4)
part.ii is part of a library called libkparts.so.4.12.3.
When I compile
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60592
Bug ID: 60592
Summary: std::array is unable to be brace/universally
initialized
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60592
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org ---
http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/cwg_active.html#1467
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60592
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org ---
If it's that DR, then this is a dup of my PR51747
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60568
--- Comment #1 from Uroš Bizjak ubizjak at gmail dot com ---
Can you please post complete command line that triggers the bug, as outlined in
[1]? Something like:
g++ ... options ... -fpreprocessed TEncSbac.ii
Please also use -march=some arch
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51747
Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |SUSPENDED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60593
Bug ID: 60593
Summary: ICE with deferred length variable in FORALL
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60592
Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51747
Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mjbshaw at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60593
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||4.9.0
--- Comment #1 from
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60567
Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60566
--- Comment #9 from Markus Trippelsdorf trippels at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Running nm on all my libs shows:
...
kde4/notepadpart.so
U _ZThn16_N6KParts13ReadWritePartD0Ev
...
kde4/okularpart.so
U
1 - 100 of 143 matches
Mail list logo
