https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98389
Bug ID: 98389
Summary: [11 regression] libstdc++-abi/abi_check fails after
r11-6249 on powerpc64 big endian
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98387
--- Comment #1 from Daniel Han-Chen ---
Oh I just noticed _mm_cmp_ps isn't actually supported for SSE targets even in
Intel's Intrinsics Guide: [_mm_cmp_ps first was supported in AVX]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98388
Bug ID: 98388
Summary: Throwing move-only parameter results in hard error in
SFINAE context
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98387
Bug ID: 98387
Summary: GCC >= 6 cannot inline _mm_cmp_ps on SSE targets
Product: gcc
Version: 10.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98386
--- Comment #2 from cqwrteur ---
My build of GCC for Windows can be found here.
https://github.com/expnkx/mingw-gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98386
--- Comment #1 from cqwrteur ---
Created attachment 49805
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=49805=edit
bugged image
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98386
Bug ID: 98386
Summary: C++20 module: file exists failure and success happen
alternatively for windows.
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98363
--- Comment #6 from cqwrteur ---
(In reply to Nathan Sidwell from comment #4)
> FWIW I think it premature to start agressively filing these kinds of
> defects. We haven't added the module testsuite yet.
Same issue on Windows. Looks like
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98348
--- Comment #5 from Hongtao.liu ---
Created attachment 49804
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=49804=edit
This patch can fix this issue
I'm testing the patch.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96378
--- Comment #5 from Nick Briggs ---
Thanks! configuring with --enable-checking=release allowed it to compile.
The final configure that I used was:
../gcc-master/configure prefix=/opt/gcc --disable-werror
--enable-checking=release CC="gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98377
cqwrteur changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98374
cqwrteur changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98362
cqwrteur changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98360
--- Comment #2 from ensadc at mailnesia dot com ---
Apparently clang++ rewrites `uintset::values` in question to
`this->uintset::values`, because it believes that `uintset::values` is valid
only if someone specializes `uintset::traits` to make it
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98376
--- Comment #2 from Paul Groke ---
I was able to reproduce the problem with the following program (see below). It
won't reproduce well on a loaded machine and you may have to fiddle with the
spin counts to get a successful repro.
I know this is
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97172
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
--- Comment #22 from Martin Sebor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98360
ensadc at mailnesia dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ensadc at mailnesia dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98370
--- Comment #7 from Hans-Peter Nilsson ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #6)
> (In reply to Hans-Peter Nilsson from comment #4)
> > JFTR, likely all "32-bit targets".
>
> Not x86, that uses int for int32_t.
So on closer inspection,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98373
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98373
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[11 Repression] Bogus |[11 Repression] Bogus
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98306
--- Comment #2 from Sergei Trofimovich ---
That makes sense. If it's a valid C++ I'm fine with closing the bug as
RESOLVED/INVALID.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98385
seurer at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98385
Bug ID: 98385
Summary: new test case g++.dg/gomp/declare-target-3.C in
r11-6257 has many fails
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97304
--- Comment #8 from Thomas Koenig ---
(In reply to Andreas Tobler from comment #7)
> Any news on this? Or can we close this PR?
Neither. As far as I can determine, this still fails.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98373
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
--- Comment #2 from H.J. Lu ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97304
--- Comment #7 from Andreas Tobler ---
Any news on this? Or can we close this PR?
TIA,
Andreas
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98384
Bug ID: 98384
Summary: new test case 20_util/to_chars/long_double.cc in
r11-6249 fails on powerpc64 BE
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98383
Bug ID: 98383
Summary: internal compiler error: in make_decl_rtl, at
varasm.c:1342
Product: gcc
Version: 10.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98380
cqwrteur changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98382
--- Comment #1 from John Paul Adrian Glaubitz ---
Created attachment 49802
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=49802=edit
Preprocessed source.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98382
Bug ID: 98382
Summary: [m68k] ICE: in output_move_qimode, at
config/m68k/m68k.c:3284 when building webkit2gtk
Product: gcc
Version: 10.2.1
URL:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98380
--- Comment #6 from cqwrteur ---
Created attachment 49801
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=49801=edit
stdout logs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98380
--- Comment #5 from cqwrteur ---
Created attachment 49800
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=49800=edit
stderr logs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98380
--- Comment #4 from cqwrteur ---
D:/msys64/mingw32/lib/gcc/i686-w64-mingw32/11.0.0/../../../../i686-w64-mingw32/bin/ld.exe:
../build-i686-w64-mingw32/libcpp/libcpp.a(lex.o):lex.c:(.text+0x8): undefined
reference to `LC0'
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98381
Bug ID: 98381
Summary: Wrong code with -O3 -march=skylake-avx512
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98380
--- Comment #3 from cqwrteur ---
Build again. still fails on 32 bits but succ on 64 bits. do not know why.
checking that generated files are newer than configure... done
configure: creating ./config.status
/bin/sh
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98370
--- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Hans-Peter Nilsson from comment #4)
> JFTR, likely all "32-bit targets".
Not x86, that uses int for int32_t.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93480
Will Wray changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||wjwray at gmail dot com
--- Comment #1 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98380
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:5dc998933e7aa737f4a45a8a2885d42d5288d51a
commit r11-6263-g5dc998933e7aa737f4a45a8a2885d42d5288d51a
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98378
--- Comment #6 from David Binderman ---
Testsuite file ./gcc.c-torture/execute/simd-6.c, with flag -O2,
has similar problems with a valgrind version of gcc trunk.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98378
David Binderman changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at redhat dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98380
--- Comment #1 from cqwrteur ---
It works for 64 bit windows but failed for 32 bit windows. I do not know why. I
could build this tomorrow but now it failed.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98380
Bug ID: 98380
Summary: bootstrapping failure on windows 32bits for libcc1
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98378
--- Comment #4 from David Binderman ---
Looks bad. Trying 5137d1ae6a1fe4a3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98368
--- Comment #5 from Kip Warner ---
*face palm* Yes, you are right! I totally forgot about the invocation at the
end of the CLI! That's what happens when I don't get enough sleep.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98379
Bug ID: 98379
Summary: Unknown tree: c_maybe_const_expr in a warning
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98378
--- Comment #3 from David Binderman ---
Looks bad. Trying 571d3fb1f40fa85c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98368
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Why do you think the compiler is crashing? You are running the compiler and
then the program and the program is what is crashing.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98368
--- Comment #3 from Kip Warner ---
Sorry, the _compiler_ crashing is expected behaviour?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98177
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Przemyslaw Wirkus :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:d44d47b49267b4265cee16d25b3f89dbf967cc0c
commit r11-6262-gd44d47b49267b4265cee16d25b3f89dbf967cc0c
Author: Przemyslaw Wirkus
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98377
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98377
--- Comment #1 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Patrick Palka :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:60cecb2b83ffcebac6e83076f5552df14b073248
commit r11-6261-g60cecb2b83ffcebac6e83076f5552df14b073248
Author: Patrick Palka
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83174
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98378
--- Comment #2 from David Binderman ---
Looks good. Trying 0dd48296433763ba
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98228
--- Comment #7 from Marius Hillenbrand ---
-flto alone is enough to cause the miscompile. make bootstrap with this config
fails in stage3, since the same commit that introduced ipa-modref. when
building the Ada runtime libraries with the stage3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98378
--- Comment #1 from David Binderman ---
git bisect in progress. Trying hash f23753c710d54fdf.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98378
Bug ID: 98378
Summary: new valgrind error for
./gcc.c-torture/execute/pr60960.c
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98377
Bug ID: 98377
Summary: bootstrapping failure on windows for floating_to_chars
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98370
--- Comment #5 from Patrick Palka ---
(In reply to Hans-Peter Nilsson from comment #4)
> JFTR, likely all "32-bit targets".
Thanks, and sorry about the build breakage. I just committed the fix r11-6260
for this particular build failure. Let
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98217
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85997
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2020-12-18
See Also|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97172
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98370
--- Comment #4 from Hans-Peter Nilsson ---
JFTR, likely all "32-bit targets".
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98370
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Patrick Palka :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:22a7e82c200d01d12e34e757e86dc9796a9bf085
commit r11-6260-g22a7e82c200d01d12e34e757e86dc9796a9bf085
Author: Patrick Palka
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98374
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Patrick Palka :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:d7bab388b818fc21dbb9111311e114ae33e11fff
commit r11-6259-gd7bab388b818fc21dbb9111311e114ae33e11fff
Author: Patrick Palka
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98321
--- Comment #5 from Tom de Vries ---
(In reply to Thomas Schwinge from comment #4)
> I had been looking into how/when PTX 'atom' is used for reductions, and
> first had a look what the back end currently might emit at all, found SDIM
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98370
--- Comment #2 from Patrick Palka ---
Patch posted:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2020-December/562287.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98374
--- Comment #1 from Patrick Palka ---
Patch posted:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2020-December/562283.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98366
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 49799
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=49799=edit
gcc11-pr98366.patch
Untested fix.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98362
--- Comment #6 from Nathan Sidwell ---
* 785b49434d2 2020-12-18 | c++: Fix windows binary files [PR 98362]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98376
--- Comment #1 from Paul Groke ---
Sorry, I only realized that using links to master doesn't make much sense after
I had already created the ticket.
Those links should be stable:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98373
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98376
Bug ID: 98376
Summary: this_thread::sleep_for(short duration) can sleep
forever on Linux
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98060
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98375
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98375
Bug ID: 98375
Summary: [meta bug] GCC 12 pending patches
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: other
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98374
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |ppalka at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93383
--- Comment #7 from Marek Polacek ---
template
struct ctad_t {
A a;
};
template
struct myclass {
};
template
constexpr auto myobject = ctad_t {Something::value};
template
using thing = myclass>;
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93383
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jbassett271 at gmail dot com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98367
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98363
--- Comment #5 from cqwrteur ---
(In reply to Nathan Sidwell from comment #4)
> FWIW I think it premature to start agressively filing these kinds of
> defects. We haven't added the module testsuite yet.
No problem. I will keep helping you. I
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98370
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98374
Bug ID: 98374
Summary: No #include on windows. Bootstrapping
failure
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98362
--- Comment #5 from cqwrteur ---
Created attachment 49798
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=49798=edit
Compilation Working patch. Tested on both x86_64-linux-gnu and
mingw-w64-x86_64-windows10
This also adds the support for
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94779
--- Comment #22 from Andrew Macleod ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #21)
> > See my comment above. It isn't any integration of VRP, just asking the
> > ranger about the range, and it isn't useless because to be able to optimize
> >
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98361
--- Comment #2 from Sven ---
Thank you.
I did ask about the issue on gcc-help, but I never got a notice about a fix.
Some ninja appears to have cherry-picked it for 10.2.x a few days after my
initial mail.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83118
--- Comment #38 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Paul Thomas :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:ce8dcc9105cbd4043d575d8b2c91309a423951a9
commit r11-6253-gce8dcc9105cbd4043d575d8b2c91309a423951a9
Author: Paul Thomas
Date: Fri
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96012
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Paul Thomas :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:ce8dcc9105cbd4043d575d8b2c91309a423951a9
commit r11-6253-gce8dcc9105cbd4043d575d8b2c91309a423951a9
Author: Paul Thomas
Date: Fri
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98358
Christophe Lyon changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|powerpc64*-linux-gnu|powerpc64*-linux-gnu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98370
Alex Coplan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98362
--- Comment #4 from cqwrteur ---
(In reply to Nathan Sidwell from comment #2)
> Created attachment 49797 [details]
> test patch
>
> care to try this?
I will modify your patch and try to support O_CLOSEXEC on Windows
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98362
--- Comment #3 from cqwrteur ---
(In reply to Nathan Sidwell from comment #2)
> Created attachment 49797 [details]
> test patch
>
> care to try this?
Sure
BTW. Windows do provide a flag O_NOINHERIT which matches O_CLOSEXEC.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98364
Nathan Sidwell changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Assignee|unassigned at gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98362
--- Comment #2 from Nathan Sidwell ---
Created attachment 49797
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=49797=edit
test patch
care to try this?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98218
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
Target|x86_64-*-*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98218
--- Comment #3 from Uroš Bizjak ---
Testcase 1:
--cut here--
typedef short vec __attribute__((vector_size(8)));
typedef unsigned short uvec __attribute__((vector_size(8)));
vec lt (vec a, vec b) { return a < b; }
vec le (vec a, vec b) { return
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98218
--- Comment #2 from Uroš Bizjak ---
Created attachment 49796
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=49796=edit
Proposed patch to implement integer vector compares
Attached patch implements integer vector compares.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98373
Bug ID: 98373
Summary: [11 Repression] Bogus error: ‘symbuf’ may be used
uninitialized at -O0
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97172
--- Comment #21 from Martin Liška ---
Just for the record, 'cava' package is also affected by this issue.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98362
Nathan Sidwell changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
1 - 100 of 137 matches
Mail list logo
