https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114640
--- Comment #1 from simon at pushface dot org ---
It turns out that the error does not occur if I change
if First_Term = Invalid_Node_Access then
-- Empty or all virtual
return
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114640
Bug ID: 114640
Summary: ICE on 'elsif' with complex function call
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: ada
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114636
Bug ID: 114636
Summary: Actual does not match formal in generic instantiation
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106037
simon at pushface dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||simon at pushface dot org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111909
simon at pushface dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114127
Bug ID: 114127
Summary: [14 regression] Assert_Failure in nlists.adb
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104342
--- Comment #5 from simon at pushface dot org ---
That thought occurred to me, but does that mean that if this code is compiled
with a release branch Bad Things will happen? (I guess the code would probably
have to get executed for that to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104342
simon at pushface dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #52327|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104342
simon at pushface dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|ICE with -gnata |[14 regression] ICE with
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113979
Bug ID: 113979
Summary: Allocation of 2D array fails when Dynamic Predicate
applied to type
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113877
--- Comment #3 from simon at pushface dot org ---
I’ve now found the related documentation[1].
I think the conclusion is that gnatchop is working-as-designed, and that this
PR should be marked WONTFIX (or INVALID), as seems best.
Sorry for
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113877
--- Comment #2 from simon at pushface dot org ---
I came across -c in ACATS[1]. I do agree it’s an uncommon usage, and indeed I
can’t think of other reasons to do it; perhaps it’s to support porting from
other compilers? (if that’s something
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113877
Bug ID: 113877
Summary: gnatchop -c puts gnat.adc in the current working
directory
Product: gcc
Version: 13.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104354
--- Comment #3 from simon at pushface dot org ---
It happens in 12.2.0, doesn’t happen in 13.1.0 or 13.2.0.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112781
Bug ID: 112781
Summary: [13?/14 regression] ICE in generic instantiation
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112529
Bug ID: 112529
Summary: ACATS test c250002 uses illegal filename on APFS
filesystem
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112461
Bug ID: 112461
Summary: [14 regression] Simple return inside extended return
loses updates to return object value
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112446
Bug ID: 112446
Summary: Switch -gnatyz included in -gnatyg
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: ada
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111909
Bug ID: 111909
Summary: Filename case sensitivity defaulted wrongly on macOS
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81114
--- Comment #9 from simon at pushface dot org ---
Created attachment 56140
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=56140=edit
C demonstrator
As noted in comment 8, the C compiler doesn’t have a problem with
finding a file with a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81114
--- Comment #8 from simon at pushface dot org ---
I think I’d forgotten that compiling páck3.ads on its own, rather than as
part of the closure, was the way to demonstrate this problem. It was NOT
fixed in darwin19 (it’s still present in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55119
--- Comment #2 from simon at pushface dot org ---
I think this is OBE: fixed 2014-08-01, r213412, by making attr->file_length
__int64.
The comment in adaint.c is still wrong! Just tested on macOS with a 5GB
download.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50502
--- Comment #3 from simon at pushface dot org ---
The sample compiles without error with GCC 13.1.0 and 14.0.0 20231008.
Close as fixed?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111813
Bug ID: 111813
Summary: Inconsistent limit in Ada.Calendar.Formatting
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111481
--- Comment #2 from simon at pushface dot org ---
A fix for the Ada issue is to link with the classic linker:
$ gnatmake hello -largs -Wl,-ld_classic
gcc -c hello.adb
gnatbind -x hello.ali
gnatlink hello.ali -Wl,-ld_classic
$
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111481
--- Comment #1 from simon at pushface dot org ---
The -macosx_version_min issue appears to have been resolved in GCC 14.0.0
20230820.
The Ada linking issue remains.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111481
Bug ID: 111481
Summary: MacOS, linker issues with Xcode 15
Product: gcc
Version: 13.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81114
--- Comment #6 from simon at pushface dot org ---
(In reply to simon from comment #1)
> Further:
>
> $ GNAT_FILE_NAME_CASE_SENSITIVE=1 gnatmake -c p*.ads
> gcc -c páck3.ads
> páck3.ads:1:10: warning: file name does not match unit name, should be
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88610
--- Comment #4 from simon at pushface dot org ---
This problem has been fixed for some time now - I think in GCC 11.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107860
--- Comment #9 from simon at pushface dot org ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #8)
> You need to do "arch -x86_64 bash" to this build really.
> Otherwise you end up with the arm64 assembler.
> So if you start with that, it should
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110467
simon at pushface dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||simon at pushface dot org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109798
--- Comment #7 from simon at pushface dot org ---
I *can* reproduce with
/opt/gcc-13.1.0-aarch64/bin/gcc -c -x ada -gnatA -Og -ffunction-sections
-fdata-sections -g -gnatwa -gnatw.X -gnatVa -gnaty3 -gnatya -gnatyA -gnatyB
-gnatyb -gnatyc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109798
simon at pushface dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||simon at pushface dot org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108157
--- Comment #2 from simon at pushface dot org ---
Still present in 13.1.0.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108801
--- Comment #3 from simon at pushface dot org ---
Fixed in GCC 13.1.0.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109472
Bug ID: 109472
Summary: [13 regression] False unread/unassigned warning for
variable in local package
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109005
--- Comment #19 from simon at pushface dot org ---
(In reply to avieira from comment #15)
> Simon, I can't compile your minimal reproducer, first it complains about
> missing the body keyword, so I added that, but then it complains about
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109005
--- Comment #13 from simon at pushface dot org ---
Not sure that it’ll make any difference, but I managed to slim the reproducer
down to a pure set of data declarations, no user code at all. It’s the very
last declaration (TIMx_CCMRx_Lower_Half)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109005
--- Comment #12 from simon at pushface dot org ---
Not sure that it’ll make any difference, but I managed to slim the reproducer
down to a pure set of data declarations, no user code at all. It’s the very
last declaration (TIMx_CCMRx_Lower_Half)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109005
--- Comment #11 from simon at pushface dot org ---
Created attachment 54597
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=54597=edit
Minimal reproducer
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109005
--- Comment #4 from simon at pushface dot org ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #3)
> Eh, I'm hoping for a C testcase ... what's the actual ICE?
This is an LLDB session -- hope that helps
$ lldb
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109005
simon at pushface dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||x86_64-apple-darwin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109005
--- Comment #1 from simon at pushface dot org ---
Created attachment 54576
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=54576=edit
Reproducer
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109005
Bug ID: 109005
Summary: [13 Regression] ICE during GIMPLE pass: ifcvt
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108801
Bug ID: 108801
Summary: ICE, task’s secondary_stack_size from parent
discriminant
Product: gcc
Version: 12.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108157
Bug ID: 108157
Summary: [12/13 regression] object subtype doesn't statically
match designated subtype
Product: gcc
Version: 12.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68849
simon at pushface dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||simon at pushface dot org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107860
--- Comment #6 from simon at pushface dot org ---
The situation with aarch64-apple-darwin vs x86_64-apple-darwin isn't I think
quite like the standard cross-compilation scenario, because of Apple's Rosetta
x86_64 emulation and the fact that all
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107860
--- Comment #3 from simon at pushface dot org ---
Created attachment 53961
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=53961=edit
gcc/config.log
As requested (this time, sorry about previous attempt)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107860
--- Comment #2 from simon at pushface dot org ---
Created attachment 53960
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=53960=edit
gcc/config.log
As requested
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107860
Bug ID: 107860
Summary: Compilation failure, ambiguous fisttp
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: bootstrap
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107568
Bug ID: 107568
Summary: Bootstrap failure on macOS 12.6 (monterey)
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107536
--- Comment #1 from simon at pushface dot org ---
Also present in GCC 13-20221030.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107536
Bug ID: 107536
Summary: [12 regression] Wrong 'not referenced' warning on
renamed variable
Product: gcc
Version: 12.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106961
--- Comment #6 from simon at pushface dot org ---
Installing the Command Line Tools 14.1 beta 3 fixes this problem.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106961
--- Comment #5 from simon at pushface dot org ---
I used the feedback app to submit FB11552589; as a first-timer I’m unsure
whether I’ve done it right.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106961
--- Comment #3 from simon at pushface dot org ---
Problem still present in Xcode 4.1beta.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106961
--- Comment #2 from simon at pushface dot org ---
For the moment, installing Command Line Tools version 13(.4) fixes this problem
(people using Xcode need to revert that).
I guess the long-term solution will depend on whether the missing
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106961
Bug ID: 106961
Summary: Testsuite failures after Command Line Tools update to
v14
Product: gcc
Version: 12.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105303
Bug ID: 105303
Summary: Assertion_Policy (Pre => Ignore) executes precondition
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61027
--- Comment #7 from simon at pushface dot org ---
I think we should close this: no such problem with GCC 11.2.0 on Darwin 21.4.0.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89583
--- Comment #4 from simon at pushface dot org ---
I just ran "make check-gnat" with
/Volumes/Miscellaneous1/x86_64/gcc/gcc/gnatmake version 12.0.1 20220311
(experimental) (x86_64-apple-darwin21), with only two fails:
FAIL: gnat.dg/bias1.adb
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63675
--- Comment #2 from simon at pushface dot org ---
Not sure when this was fixed, but OK in 11.2.0:
$ /opt/gcc-11.2.0/bin/gnatmake -c -u -f union.ads
gcc -c union.ads
union.ads:15:06: warning: discriminated record has no direct equivalent in C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80869
--- Comment #1 from simon at pushface dot org ---
This was fixed 4 years ago.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104871
Bug ID: 104871
Summary: macosx-version-min wrong for macOS >= Big Sur
(darwin20)
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104751
Bug ID: 104751
Summary: Array aggregates using parens aren’t obsolescent
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94181
--- Comment #1 from simon at pushface dot org ---
Fixed in 10.1.0 (also OK in 11.2.0, 12.0.1)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99360
--- Comment #9 from simon at pushface dot org ---
In gcc 12.0.1 of 20220128, we get
$ gnatmake -c -u -f iteration.adb
gcc -c iteration.adb
a-stream.ads:82:04: error: construct not allowed in configurable run-time mode
a-stream.ads:82:04: error:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104354
--- Comment #1 from simon at pushface dot org ---
Created attachment 52334
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=52334=edit
GCC 12-compatible RTS
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104354
Bug ID: 104354
Summary: ICE with Partition_Elaboration_Policy (Sequential)
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104342
Bug ID: 104342
Summary: ICE with -gnata -fcallgraph-info=su
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: ada
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104258
Bug ID: 104258
Summary: [11/12 regression] Generic formal ">" used incorrectly
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70867
simon at pushface dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||simon at pushface dot org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86916
--- Comment #10 from simon at pushface dot org ---
This was fixed in 10.1.0, and is still fixed in 11.1.0:
$ /opt/gcc-10.1.0/bin/gnatmake -c -u -f -gnatl *.adb
gcc -c -gnatl animation.adb
[...]
==Error messages for source file:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99802
Bug ID: 99802
Summary: [11 regression] Assignment of aggregate done
component-by-component
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99360
--- Comment #3 from simon at pushface dot org ---
(In reply to Eric Botcazou from comment #2)
> Created attachment 50297 [details]
> Stopgap fix
>
> To be applied on the 11 branch only.
Worked a treat! on both x86_64 (for the code in the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99020
--- Comment #5 from simon at pushface dot org ---
(In reply to Eric Botcazou from comment #4)
> This should compile now.
It does, indeed. Thanks!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99360
Bug ID: 99360
Summary: ICE in generalized iteration
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: ada
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99020
Bug ID: 99020
Summary: ICE in record containing discriminated accesses
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
79 matches
Mail list logo
