https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63802
Bug ID: 63802
Summary: UBSan doesn't catch misaligned access if address is
16-bytes (or more) aligned
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62018
--- Comment #12 from rguenther at suse dot de rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Sun, 9 Nov 2014, fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62018
--- Comment #8 from Francois-Xavier Coudert fxcoudert at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62018
--- Comment #13 from rguenther at suse dot de rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Sun, 9 Nov 2014, fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62018
Francois-Xavier Coudert fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62018
--- Comment #14 from Francois-Xavier Coudert fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #12)
So I bet apple GCC 4.2 is affected as well - not sure if LLVM
provides libgcc_s on newer systems.
Apple does not
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62018
--- Comment #15 from rguenther at suse dot de rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Mon, 10 Nov 2014, fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62018
--- Comment #14 from Francois-Xavier Coudert fxcoudert at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53579
Ramana Radhakrishnan ramana at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ramana
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62018
--- Comment #16 from Francois-Xavier Coudert fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #15)
Your example directly calling __addvsi3 should suffice for that.
I've filed it (radar #18924081), but I don't expect
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62018
--- Comment #17 from Iain Sandoe iains at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Francois-Xavier Coudert from comment #16)
(In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #15)
Your example directly calling __addvsi3 should suffice for that.
I've
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63762
Ramana Radhakrishnan ramana at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62018
--- Comment #18 from Francois-Xavier Coudert fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Iain Sandoe from comment #17)
if it's part of compiler-rt we can just post a patch on llvm-commits and
that will eventually percolate through to the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63778
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org ---
I can't reproduce it on x86_64-linux, neither with unreduced zheev.F -DSPEC_CPU
nor with -march=native added. Trying a cross to ppc64-linux (BE).
HJ, please provide more detailed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63778
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63785
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63580
Markus Trippelsdorf trippels at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63803
Bug ID: 63803
Summary: When GCC 4.9.2 compile with option -O2, the target is
error.
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63798
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63803
Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63803
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Dereferencing a null pointer is undefined.
-fisolate-erroneous-paths-dereference changes some of them into __builtin_trap
and for arm that is udf #0.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63800
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63804
Bug ID: 63804
Summary: ice in find_oldest_value_reg with -g -O2
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63804
Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63573
--- Comment #14 from Martin Liška marxin at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Andreas Schwab from comment #12)
This also breaks g++.dg/ipa/pr63587-2.C on powerpc -m32, but the patches in
#c6 and #c8 don't fix that.
$ gcc/xg++ -Bgcc/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63800
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Ok - so when we enter tail-merging we have in BB2
bb 2:
# .MEM_9 = VDEF .MEM_8(D)
b = 1;
# .MEM_10 = VDEF .MEM_9
d[1] = 1;
if (1 != 0)
goto bb 11;
else
goto bb 12;
and at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63803
--- Comment #3 from Airbak airbak.li at huawei dot com ---
Thank you for your reply!
-fisolate-erroneous-paths-dereference is a new option in GCC-4.9.x.
When I use GCC-4.8.x, it is OK and will not have this problem.
More and more people are
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63803
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63803
--- Comment #5 from Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Airbak from comment #3)
2.
*((unsigned int *)0) is OK
*((volatile unsigned int *)0) is not OK.
Why the volatile makes different?
Because volatile prevents the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63804
Marek Polacek mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vmakarov at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63803
--- Comment #6 from Marc Glisse glisse at gcc dot gnu.org ---
If dereferencing 0 is ok on your platform, you need at least
-fno-delete-null-pointer-checks. I don't know if the isolate pass checks that
flag though (it probably should).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63804
Markus Trippelsdorf trippels at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63803
Airbak airbak.li at huawei dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|CLOSED
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63805
Bug ID: 63805
Summary: [4.9/4.8/5 Regression] ICE: in extract_insn, at
recog.c:2154 with -mcpu=power8
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.4
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61127
Francois-Xavier Coudert fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|x86_64-apple-darwin13.1.0 |
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48002
Francois-Xavier Coudert fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|i686-apple-darwin9 |
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63748
--- Comment #6 from Ulrich Weigand uweigand at gcc dot gnu.org ---
I guess I can see why there might be an abnormal edge starting at bb 3, or at
least, that the compiler might not be easily able to deduce that it isn't
necessary.
However, I do
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48013
Francois-Xavier Coudert fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|i686-apple-darwin9 |
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48293
Francois-Xavier Coudert fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|i686-apple-darwin9 |
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48012
Francois-Xavier Coudert fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|i686-apple-darwin9 |
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48039
Francois-Xavier Coudert fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|i686-apple-darwin9 |
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63804
--- Comment #4 from Markus Trippelsdorf trippels at gcc dot gnu.org ---
trippels@gcc2-power8 status % cat freelist_test.ii
template typename _Tp struct A
{
_Tp _M_i;
void
load ()
{
_Tp a;
__atomic_load (_M_i, a, 0);
}
};
class
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63804
--- Comment #5 from Markus Trippelsdorf trippels at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Please ignore comment 4.
Testcase without implicit functions:
markus@x4 tmp % cat bug169.c
struct brw_context
{
int gen;
} e;
int a, d;
long b;
enum brw_reg_type
{
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63806
Bug ID: 63806
Summary: #UBSAN ignores signed char possible overflow
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63573
--- Comment #15 from Jan Hubicka hubicka at ucw dot cz ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63573
--- Comment #14 from Martin Liška marxin at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Andreas Schwab from comment #12)
This also breaks
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62141
Francois-Xavier Coudert fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63806
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63771
Aaro Koskinen aaro.koskinen at iki dot fi changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||aaro.koskinen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63806
--- Comment #2 from Yury Gribov y.gribov at samsung dot com ---
I think Marat meant that narrowing cast from int to char can be undefined and
it makes sense to emit some check for it as well.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63805
Markus Trippelsdorf trippels at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63806
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
No, narrowing conversion is implementation defined, and gcc defines that to the
modulo 2^N wrapping, so this is not undefined behavior, and furthermore,
something you'd complain about
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61018
Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63573
--- Comment #16 from Martin Liška marxin at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Jan Hubicka from comment #15)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63573
--- Comment #14 from Martin Liška marxin at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63807
Bug ID: 63807
Summary: -Wvarargs doesn't warn when last argument has type
that causes undefined behaviour
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55479
Francois-Xavier Coudert fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63798
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Nov 10 14:06:56 2014
New Revision: 217287
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=217287root=gccview=rev
Log:
2014-11-10 Richard Biener rguent...@suse.de
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63798
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63796
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63799
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63805
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.8.5 |---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48002
Arnaud Charlet charlet at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||charlet at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48012
Arnaud Charlet charlet at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48293
Arnaud Charlet charlet at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63806
--- Comment #4 from Yury Gribov y.gribov at samsung dot com ---
Looks like some compilers check integer demotions (e.g. MS checks with their
/RTCc flag). I wonder if it makes sense to add an optional flag for this
(obviously not enabled under
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63800
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Nov 10 14:31:31 2014
New Revision: 217288
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=217288root=gccview=rev
Log:
2014-11-10 Richard Biener rguent...@suse.de
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63778
--- Comment #5 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #3)
I can't reproduce it on x86_64-linux, neither with unreduced zheev.F
-DSPEC_CPU
nor with -march=native added. Trying a cross to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63808
Bug ID: 63808
Summary: [arm] Invalid register saving in FIQ handler causes
register corruption
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63809
Bug ID: 63809
Summary: Missing warning on extra template
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: diagnostic
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62018
--- Comment #19 from Francois-Xavier Coudert fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Iain Sandoe from comment #17)
if it's part of compiler-rt we can just post a patch on llvm-commits and
that will eventually percolate through to the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63778
Richard Biener rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63778
--- Comment #7 from rguenther at suse dot de rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Mon, 10 Nov 2014, hjl.tools at gmail dot com wrote:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63778
--- Comment #5 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63265
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62018
howarth at bromo dot med.uc.edu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||howarth at bromo dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62018
--- Comment #21 from Francois-Xavier Coudert fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu.org ---
True, we could also follow this approach again
(https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42333#c55), but it's more of a
hack really.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63796
Jan Hubicka hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka at gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62018
--- Comment #22 from howarth at bromo dot med.uc.edu ---
(In reply to Francois-Xavier Coudert from comment #21)
True, we could also follow this approach again
(https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42333#c55), but it's more of a
hack
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63765
--- Comment #6 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ro at CeBiTec dot
Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
--- Comment #5 from David Edelsohn dje at gcc dot gnu.org ---
If _XOPEN_SOURCE is removed from thr.c completely, the testsuite results
revert
to 1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62018
--- Comment #23 from Iain Sandoe iains at gcc dot gnu.org ---
My take is:
1. It's good we have an upstream patch - if it percolates through that's one
less thing to worry about - although (of course) that will never realistically
be available
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63765
--- Comment #7 from David Edelsohn dje at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Yes, the single objc failure existed before the patch. But I don't know if
*other* targets need _XOPEN_SOURCE=500.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63765
--- Comment #8 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ro at CeBiTec dot
Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
--- Comment #7 from David Edelsohn dje at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Yes, the single objc failure existed before the patch. But I don't know if
*other*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62018
--- Comment #24 from howarth at bromo dot med.uc.edu ---
I always thought the major reorganization would be forced whenever Apple
finally fully deprecated the libgcc_s.10.5.dylib stub, the associated
libgcc_s.10.4.dylib symlink pointing at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63685
Francois-Xavier Coudert fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63765
--- Comment #9 from David Edelsohn dje at gcc dot gnu.org ---
I would have expected _XOPEN_SOURCE=500 to be defined in a host-specific
configure file (like libstdc++-v3/config/os/.../os_defines.h) or added to the
compile line in configure.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61407
Francois-Xavier Coudert fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63765
--- Comment #10 from Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Let's go with the one defining _XOPEN_SOURCE only for Solaris until someone
programs David's suggestion of the host-specific configure file.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61018
Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||manu at gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61407
howarth at bromo dot med.uc.edu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||howarth at bromo dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63265
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63375
--- Comment #11 from Pranith Kumar bobby.prani at gmail dot com ---
Is there any work around for this in the mean time? Thanks!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42978
--- Comment #2 from simon at pushface dot org ---
I posted a patch for this in
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-02/msg00325.html, and Arnaud approved
it in the followup message, but it never got applied.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63778
--- Comment #8 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com ---
[hjl@gnu-mic-2 delta-fortran]$ cat foo.f
SUBROUTINE ZUNG2L( M, N, K, A, LDA, TAU, WORK, INFO )
COMPLEX*16 A( LDA, * ), TAU( * ), WORK( * )
IF( M.LT.0 ) THEN
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42978
Francois-Xavier Coudert fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61529
--- Comment #11 from Jiong Wang jiwang at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: jiwang
Date: Mon Nov 10 17:53:21 2014
New Revision: 217303
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=217303root=gccview=rev
Log:
[PATCH] Partially fix PR61529, bound basic block
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63778
--- Comment #9 from hjl at gcc dot gnu.org hjl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: hjl
Date: Mon Nov 10 18:08:00 2014
New Revision: 217304
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=217304root=gccview=rev
Log:
Add a testcase for PR tree-optimization/63778
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39336
Francois-Xavier Coudert fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63776
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Tom Straub from comment #2)
Hi Tim,
Okay, a program very similar to this using the Boost REGEX library and ICU
4.55 works just fine with this.
According to my
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63425
Cary Coutant ccoutant at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61321
Cary Coutant ccoutant at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||riku at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63573
--- Comment #17 from Jan Hubicka hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: hubicka
Date: Mon Nov 10 19:14:17 2014
New Revision: 217307
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=217307root=gccview=rev
Log:
PR bootstrap/63573
* calls.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63244
Cary Coutant ccoutant at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63244
Cary Coutant ccoutant at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|FIXED |DUPLICATE
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61321
Cary Coutant ccoutant at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63784
--- Comment #6 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com ---
Created attachment 33931
-- https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=33931action=edit
A testcase
[hjl@gnu-6 pr63784]$ make
./libtool --tag=CXX --mode=compile
1 - 100 of 126 matches
Mail list logo
