https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19317
--- Comment #52 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Sam James :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a75c6295252d0d998a18927dc7510fac965134c4
commit r15-2349-ga75c6295252d0d998a18927dc7510fac965134c4
Author: Sam James
Date: Thu Jul 1
--- Comment #51 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-08 21:56 ---
Subject: Bug 19317
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Dec 8 21:56:44 2005
New Revision: 108253
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=108253
Log:
PR c++/19317
* g++.dg/opt/pr19317-1.C: New test.
--- Comment #50 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-08 21:50 ---
Subject: Bug 19317
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Dec 8 21:50:38 2005
New Revision: 108247
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=108247
Log:
PR c++/19317
* g++.dg/opt/pr19317-1.C: New test.
--- Additional Comments From kev dot gilbert at cdu dot edu dot au
2005-09-30 01:59 ---
A discussion on another mailing list revealed the page
http://lists.kde.org/?l=kde-devel&m=112537321024777&w=2 where it states that
the bug is in libstdc++ and can be overcome by setting the environ
--- Additional Comments From bangerth at dealii dot org 2005-09-27 14:01
---
Then the issue you are seeing is a separate one, and we would need to
have a smaller testcase to figure out what is going on. Please try to
work on finding one so that we can look at it.
Thanks
Wolfgang
--- Additional Comments From kev dot gilbert at cdu dot edu dot au
2005-09-27 07:28 ---
All three testcases compile & run ok.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19317
--- Additional Comments From bangerth at dealii dot org 2005-09-27 00:44
---
Kevin,
can you try out the various testcases from this report and see whether your
compiler fails any of them?
W.
--
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Additional Comments From kev dot gilbert at cdu dot edu dot au
2005-09-26 23:17 ---
Whilst this bug has been marked as resolved, I am still experiencing the same
problems (with arts-1.4.91 - the version shipped with KDE 35. Beta 1).
My gcc version info : gcc (GCC) 4.1.0 20050
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-08
14:13 ---
Subject: Bug 19317
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: gcc-4_0-rhl-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-07-08 14:13:13
Modified files:
gcc/testsuite : Ch
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-24
14:11 ---
Fixed.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-23
14:44 ---
Subject: Bug 19317
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-06-23 14:44:21
Modified files:
gcc: ChangeLog tree.h calls.c tree-inline.
--- Additional Comments From bernie at develer dot com 2005-05-19 10:42
---
(In reply to comment #39)
> (In reply to comment #37)
>
> > Reducing a testcase isn't trivial, but I'll try.
>
> try to pass to the ./configure the kde_cv_val_gcc_visibility_bug=yes switch.
> rebuild an
--- Additional Comments From bernie at develer dot com 2005-05-19 09:45
---
(In reply to comment #38)
> > My backtrace looks suspiciously similar to the backtrace reported in
> > comment #14.
>
> Yep, yours is probably the same bug as that in comment #14, which I don't
> think is relat
--- Additional Comments From pluto at agmk dot net 2005-05-19 09:04 ---
(In reply to comment #37)
> Reducing a testcase isn't trivial, but I'll try.
try to pass to the ./configure the kde_cv_val_gcc_visibility_bug=yes switch.
rebuild and test artsd. it may help.
currently i h
--- Additional Comments From jason at redhat dot com 2005-05-18 21:17
---
Subject: Re: [4.1 Regression] removing a temporary return
value when we cannot
On 18 May 2005 20:45:22 -, "bernie at develer dot com" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> My backtrace looks suspiciously similar to
--- Additional Comments From bernie at develer dot com 2005-05-18 20:45
---
(In reply to comment #36)
> (In reply to comment #35)
> > I'm still seeing the artsd miscompilation with
> > gcc 4.0.0 20050512 (Red Hat 4.0.0-5), which contains everything
> > from gcc-4_0-branch upto 13-05-2005
--- Additional Comments From jason at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-18 19:38
---
(In reply to comment #35)
> I'm still seeing the artsd miscompilation with
> gcc 4.0.0 20050512 (Red Hat 4.0.0-5), which contains everything
> from gcc-4_0-branch upto 13-05-2005 (circa).
A backtrace showing
--- Additional Comments From bernie at develer dot com 2005-05-17 05:40
---
I'm still seeing the artsd miscompilation with
gcc 4.0.0 20050512 (Red Hat 4.0.0-5), which contains everything
from gcc-4_0-branch upto 13-05-2005 (circa).
This is from an arts *client*:
Starting program: /home
--- Additional Comments From mueller at kde dot org 2005-04-13 16:57
---
can we think about retargeting fixing the optimisation for 4.0.1 ?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19317
--- Additional Comments From mueller at kde dot org 2005-04-13 01:36
---
looking at it - the artsd crash is not reproduceable for me. is this one still
there?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19317
--- Additional Comments From mueller at kde dot org 2005-04-13 01:10
---
the konqueror startup crash is fixed by:
@@ -3716,7 +3716,7 @@ void KonqMainWindow::initActions()
m_paActivateNextTab = new KAction( i18n( "Activate Next Tab" ), "tab_next",
QApplication::reverseLayout() ?
--- Additional Comments From mlists at juma dot me dot uk 2005-04-12 20:01
---
(In reply to comment #11)
> CC'ed.
--
What|Removed |Added
CC|
--- Additional Comments From mueller at kde dot org 2005-04-12 10:27
---
there are two more critical miscompilations in branch, popping up
12 and 10 days ago.
I'm currently trying to deduce a testcase, but maybe that information
already is sufficient to narrow down the faulty patch
--- Additional Comments From pluto at pld-linux dot org 2005-04-11 14:43
---
(In reply to comment #28)
> Subject: Re: [4.1 Regression] removing a temporary return
> value when we cannot
>
> On 11 Apr 2005 08:59:58 -, "pluto at pld-linux dot org"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >>
--- Additional Comments From jason at redhat dot com 2005-04-11 12:48
---
Subject: Re: [4.1 Regression] removing a temporary return
value when we cannot
On 11 Apr 2005 08:59:58 -, "pluto at pld-linux dot org" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>> Have you tested the 4.0 branch with the
--- Additional Comments From pluto at pld-linux dot org 2005-04-11 08:59
---
(In reply to comment #26)
> Subject: Re: [4.1 Regression] removing a temporary return
> value when we cannot
>
> Have you tested the 4.0 branch with the temporary fix I applied?
>
> Jason
>
I applied a tem
--- Additional Comments From jason at redhat dot com 2005-04-11 07:49
---
Subject: Re: [4.1 Regression] removing a temporary return
value when we cannot
Have you tested the 4.0 branch with the temporary fix I applied?
Jason
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19317
--- Additional Comments From pluto at pld-linux dot org 2005-04-09 02:29
---
(In reply to comment #24)
> (In reply to comment #15)
please ignore previous post.
gcc passes params in the right way but something is wrong.
with the original sourcecode gdb shows stack frame with
invalid par
--- Additional Comments From pluto at pld-linux dot org 2005-04-08 13:33
---
(In reply to comment #15)
> thats the same issue like the konqueror crash which I couldn't
> find a workaround for in gcc either.
(gdb) bt
#0 ~QIconSet (this=0x8209614) at qshared.h:50
~QIconSet (this=0x8
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-04-07
21:01 ---
Work around applied to the 4.0 branch so this is only 4.1 regression now
--
What|Removed |Added
--
30 matches
Mail list logo
