https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71217
Bug ID: 71217
Summary: [concepts] Incorrect recursive concept evaluation
Product: gcc
Version: 6.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71216
Bug ID: 71216
Summary: Incorrect PPC assembly due to inserted .machine
pseudo-op
Product: gcc
Version: 6.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71215
Bug ID: 71215
Summary: Compile error when using in-class initialization of
template class attributes (c++11)
Product: gcc
Version: 5.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Sev
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71115
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71115
--- Comment #10 from Martin Sebor ---
Author: msebor
Date: Fri May 20 22:23:10 2016
New Revision: 236549
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=236549&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c/71115 - [4.9/5/6/7 Regression] Missing warning: excess elements
in s
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70884
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[6/7 regression] 2nd SRA|[6 regression] 2nd SRA pass
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71212
--- Comment #5 from Petr Ovtchenkov ---
Created attachment 38537
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=38537&action=edit
patch that fix issue
This changes fix issue for me. But I know nothing what CANADIAN ad-hoc
workaround intend
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55917
Howard Hinnant changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||howard.hinnant at gmail dot com
--- Com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70884
--- Comment #7 from Martin Jambor ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Fri May 20 21:04:31 2016
New Revision: 236544
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=236544&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[PR 70884] Constant pool SRA fix
2016-05-20 Martin Jambor
P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66461
--- Comment #14 from Jerry DeLisle ---
(In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #13)
--- snip ---
>
> Although I partially agree with that, I don't understand why
>
> if ( x(1) < 0 .or. &
> x(2) < 0 ) print
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71214
Bug ID: 71214
Summary: Typo in feature test macro for rvalue references
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70466
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Version|6.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70712
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71210
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70466
--- Comment #8 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: paolo
Date: Fri May 20 19:09:59 2016
New Revision: 236530
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=236530&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
/cp
2016-05-20 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/70466
*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71210
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri May 20 19:06:09 2016
New Revision: 236529
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=236529&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/71210
* gimple-fold.c (gimple_fold_call): Do not re
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71204
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71204
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri May 20 19:00:54 2016
New Revision: 236528
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=236528&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR fortran/71204
* frontend-passes.c (realloc_string_callb
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71204
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri May 20 18:52:38 2016
New Revision: 236526
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=236526&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR fortran/71204
* frontend-passes.c (realloc_string_callb
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71204
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri May 20 18:49:24 2016
New Revision: 236525
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=236525&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR fortran/71204
* frontend-passes.c (realloc_string_callb
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69368
--- Comment #92 from Mike Vermeulen ---
Passes with snapshot: gcc-7-20160501
Fails with snapshot: gcc-7-20160508
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51488
--- Comment #8 from Paolo Carlini ---
Frankly I didn't have high expectations ;) But certainly we should do something
about all these pretty old bugs about infinite template recursions which we are
not catching.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69368
Mike Vermeulen changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mike at vermeulen dot com
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71213
Bug ID: 71213
Summary: ICE on invalid code
Product: gcc
Version: 6.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unass
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51488
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #7
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70528
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||redi at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #15
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52563
--- Comment #17 from Andre Vieira ---
Ah yes my bad, its not sccp doing it... got a bit confused there... It is
indeed sink that moves that sequence down. Sorry for the noise.
Question remains on how to clean this up though. Ideally you would li
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70572
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[4.9/5/6/7 Regression] ICE |[4.9/5/6 Regression] ICE on
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70572
--- Comment #3 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: paolo
Date: Fri May 20 16:24:58 2016
New Revision: 236522
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=236522&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
/cp
2016-05-20 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/70572
*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71070
--- Comment #2 from Oleksii Oleksenko ---
Sorry, I guess, I had a wrong configuration. I had the CHKP_RT_BNDPRESERVE
variable set to '1', and after I tried setting it to '0', the problem
dissipated.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70738
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70738
--- Comment #2 from hjl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: hjl
Date: Fri May 20 16:06:39 2016
New Revision: 236520
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=236520&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Add -mgeneral-regs-only option
X86 Linux kernel is compiled only w
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52563
--- Comment #16 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Andre Vieira from comment #15)
> So the code change for sccp moves the following sequence out of the loop:
>
> _2 = (sizetype) i_30;
> _3 = _2 * 8;
> _10 = _3 + 4;
> _1 = &a +
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70634
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
No objections from me.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52563
--- Comment #15 from Andre Vieira ---
So the code change for sccp moves the following sequence out of the loop:
_2 = (sizetype) i_30;
_3 = _2 * 8;
_10 = _3 + 4;
_1 = &a + _10;
a_p = _1;
This is basically:
*a_p = &a[last_i].y;
I agre
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52563
amker at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||amker at gcc dot gnu.org
--- C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70634
--- Comment #6 from Jason Merrill ---
Created attachment 38536
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=38536&action=edit
patch for gcc 5
Here's the patch if anyone wants to build their own gcc 5 with this fixed.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70634
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|WAITING
--- Comment #5 from Jason Merril
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68030
--- Comment #9 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
I had a patch for this, will send for review.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71208
Yaakov Selkowitz changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://sourceware.org/bugz
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71192
user1172464 at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |major
--- Comment #1 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67937
--- Comment #6 from Jan Hubicka ---
We can have negative counters on fake edges in case the code uses abnormal
edges that we can't instrument correctly. setjmp/longjmp is one of examples.
If you profile kernel, you will have inconsistencies in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67992
--- Comment #7 from Jan Hubicka ---
Joshua: gcov is seriously old tool. There is quite some need to handle profile
in more generic matter (for autoFDO/LTO and other cases). So if you have more
flexible implementation, it would make sense to repla
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67992
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67937
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
--- Comment #1 from Ilya Enkovich ---
Couldn't reproduce with these versions:
gcc version 7.0.0 20160520
gcc version 6.1.1 20160520
gcc version 5.3.1 20160520
I always get output:
short string: short string
Allocated a big object
long string: I'm a long string. My size is bigger than 16 bytes
C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69526
--- Comment #13 from rdapp at linux dot vnet.ibm.com ---
Created attachment 38535
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=38535&action=edit
VRP/match.pd patch
Found some time again and hacked together a fix for match.pd and VRP. The
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71166
--- Comment #4 from Nathan Sidwell ---
build_vec_init_elt (tree.c) says:
/* Subroutine of build_vec_init_expr: Build up a single element
intialization as a proxy for the full array initialization to get things
marked as used and any approp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67278
--- Comment #14 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Fri May 20 13:24:29 2016
New Revision: 236512
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=236512&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2016-05-20 Richard Biener
Backport from mainline
2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69720
--- Comment #7 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Fri May 20 13:03:19 2016
New Revision: 236510
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=236510&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2016-05-20 Richard Biener
Backport from mainline
20
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71196
--- Comment #3 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
Related to pr67804 (ICE at the same line) and pr68569 (ICE at the next line).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71212
--- Comment #4 from Petr Ovtchenkov ---
(In reply to Petr Ovtchenkov from comment #3)
>
> ...
Is following still actual?
# This lets us hard-code the functionality we know we'll have in the cross
# target environment. "Let" is a sugar-coat
279.f90 -O (internal compiler error)
>
> /opt/gcc/gcc-20160520/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/graphite/pr68279.f90:8:0:
> internal compiler error: Aborted
> 0xb9e487 crash_signal
> ../../gcc/toplev.c:333
> 0x10f4473 extract_affine_chrec
> ../../gcc/graphi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52563
--- Comment #13 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Fri, 20 May 2016, andre.simoesdiasvieira at arm dot com wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52563
>
> Andre Vieira changed:
>
>What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66461
--- Comment #13 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> I have a patch testing for this. I am not sure this is a regression.
> I see it as far back as 4.5. I don't have any earlier builds.
Gcc-4.3.1 and 4.4.7 give the errors
pr66461.f:4.27:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70729
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=71081
--- Comment #3 from Thomas Preud'homme ---
Author: thopre01
Date: Fri May 20 12:36:57 2016
New Revision: 236507
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=236507&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2016-05-20 Thomas Preud'homme
PR libstdc++/71081
* tes
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70729
--- Comment #18 from Andreas Schwab ---
FAIL: gfortran.dg/graphite/pr68279.f90 -O (internal compiler error)
/opt/gcc/gcc-20160520/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/graphite/pr68279.f90:8:0:
internal compiler error: Aborted
0xb9e487 crash_signal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71212
--- Comment #3 from Petr Ovtchenkov ---
(In reply to Petr Ovtchenkov from comment #2)
> ...
Mmm, may be this line is origin of problem:
libstdc++-v3/configure:GLIBCXX_INCLUDES="$GLIBCXX_INCLUDES
-I\${includedir}"
(missed ${DESTDIR} in -I\$
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52563
Andre Vieira changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||andre.simoesdiasvieira@arm.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71210
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri May 20 11:58:49 2016
New Revision: 236506
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=236506&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/71210
* gimple-fold.c (gimple_fold_call): Do not re
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71212
--- Comment #2 from Petr Ovtchenkov ---
No, adding
--with-sysroot=/export/staging/ptr/continuous/development/../arm-unknown-linux-gnueabi
\
--oldincludedir=/export/staging/ptr/continuous/development/../arm-unknown-linux-gnueabi/usr/inclu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29756
--- Comment #15 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri May 20 11:55:58 2016
New Revision: 236505
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=236505&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/29756
gcc.dg/tree-ssa/vector-6.c: Ad
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71196
--- Comment #2 from georg.bugzilla at gmx dot at ---
Thanks for the feedback!
I can confirm that workaround 1 (reversing order in substructure_)works.
Workaround 2 also works, but it is not applicable in my case (auto generated
code - arbitrary
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71206
Marc Glisse changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71079
Marc Glisse changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71079
--- Comment #2 from Marc Glisse ---
Author: glisse
Date: Fri May 20 09:44:50 2016
New Revision: 236504
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=236504&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR71206: inconsistent types after match.pd transformation
2016-05-20 Marc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71206
--- Comment #7 from Marc Glisse ---
Author: glisse
Date: Fri May 20 09:44:50 2016
New Revision: 236504
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=236504&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR71206: inconsistent types after match.pd transformation
2016-05-20 Marc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71207
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Priority|P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71208
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71210
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71148
--- Comment #10 from Ilya Enkovich ---
(In reply to Eric Botcazou from comment #9)
> > I did add PR reference but it didn't work for some reason.
>
> No, you didn't in the commit message, which is where it is needed:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/g
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71148
--- Comment #9 from Eric Botcazou ---
> I did add PR reference but it didn't work for some reason.
No, you didn't in the commit message, which is where it is needed:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2016-05/msg00780.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71191
--- Comment #6 from dhowells at redhat dot com ---
There are a couple of ways the problem could be reduced in scope. Most of the
constructs that the kernel has that fall into this category are conditional
adds/subtracts:
typedef struct { in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29756
--- Comment #14 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Fri May 20 09:17:16 2016
New Revision: 236501
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=236501&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2016-05-20 Richard Guenther
PR tree-optimization/29756
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70809
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71185
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70809
--- Comment #6 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: ktkachov
Date: Fri May 20 09:12:59 2016
New Revision: 236500
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=236500&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[AArch64] PR target/70809: Delete aarch64_vmls pattern
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71185
--- Comment #7 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Fri May 20 09:09:28 2016
New Revision: 236499
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=236499&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2016-05-20 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/71185
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71206
--- Comment #6 from Marc Glisse ---
(In reply to Ilya Enkovich from comment #5)
> Could you please also check if it is a dup of PR71079?
Cf https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-05/msg01598.html ;-)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71207
--- Comment #3 from Vladimir Simonov ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #2)
> Started with r229859, -fno-devirtualize -O2 works.
Thank you for hint with workaround
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70941
--- Comment #15 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Fri May 20 08:51:06 2016
New Revision: 236497
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=236497&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2016-05-20 Richard Biener
Backport from mainline
2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70941
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70623
--- Comment #10 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Fri May 20 08:51:06 2016
New Revision: 236497
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=236497&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2016-05-20 Richard Biener
Backport from mainline
2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70780
--- Comment #8 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Fri May 20 08:51:06 2016
New Revision: 236497
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=236497&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2016-05-20 Richard Biener
Backport from mainline
20
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67921
--- Comment #12 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Fri May 20 08:51:06 2016
New Revision: 236497
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=236497&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2016-05-20 Richard Biener
Backport from mainline
2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70931
--- Comment #7 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Fri May 20 08:51:06 2016
New Revision: 236497
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=236497&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2016-05-20 Richard Biener
Backport from mainline
20
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71204
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71206
Ilya Enkovich changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ienkovich at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71148
--- Comment #8 from Ilya Enkovich ---
(In reply to Eric Botcazou from comment #7)
> Thanks. Please add a reference to the PR in the ChangeLog next time, this
> will automatically add a cross-reference in the audit trail.
I did add PR reference
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71212
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Shouldn't you be using --with-sysroot to tell GCC where to find the target libs
for the cross-compiler?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71210
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71210
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
93 matches
Mail list logo