https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66523
--- Comment #17 from Jack Howarth howarth.at.gcc at gmail dot com ---
Any response on the request for RM approval for adding this to 5.2.0?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66523
--- Comment #18 from mrs at gcc dot gnu.org mrs at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: mrs
Date: Thu Jul 9 17:50:58 2015
New Revision: 225623
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=225623root=gccview=rev
Log:
2015-07-09 Iain Sandoe
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66523
--- Comment #19 from mrs at gcc dot gnu.org mrs at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: mrs
Date: Thu Jul 9 17:56:23 2015
New Revision: 225624
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=225624root=gccview=rev
Log:
2015-07-09 Iain Sandoe
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66523
mrs at gcc dot gnu.org mrs at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66523
--- Comment #21 from Jack Howarth howarth.at.gcc at gmail dot com ---
(In reply to m...@gcc.gnu.org from comment #15)
Jack, can you spin a gcc-4.9 test?
Regression test results for current gcc-4_9-branch with patch applied posted at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66523
--- Comment #12 from Jack Howarth howarth.at.gcc at gmail dot com ---
Regression testing of gcc-5.2.0-RC-20150707 with
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35773 applied posted at...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66523
--- Comment #15 from mrs at gcc dot gnu.org mrs at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Jack, can you spin a gcc-4.9 test?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66523
--- Comment #13 from mrs at gcc dot gnu.org mrs at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: mrs
Date: Wed Jul 8 16:56:46 2015
New Revision: 225565
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=225565root=gccview=rev
Log:
2015-07-08 Iain Sandoe
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66523
mrs at gcc dot gnu.org mrs at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66523
--- Comment #16 from Jack Howarth howarth.at.gcc at gmail dot com ---
Regression testing of gcc trunk with fix posted at
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2015-07/msg00873.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66523
--- Comment #9 from mrs at gcc dot gnu.org mrs at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Ok. Ok for all active release branches.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66523
Iain Sandoe iains at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66523
--- Comment #11 from mrs at gcc dot gnu.org mrs at gcc dot gnu.org ---
No, but one has to get RM approval. Should be easy enough to get that, as long
as the work gets done before they make the last snapshot.
Does someone have the regression
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66523
--- Comment #10 from Jack Howarth howarth.at.gcc at gmail dot com ---
I assume we have missed the window for gcc 5.2.0.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66523
mrs at gcc dot gnu.org mrs at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mrs at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66523
--- Comment #7 from Iain Sandoe iains at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to m...@gcc.gnu.org from comment #6)
Another proposal, any symbol with an 'L.*' spelling should be not so marked,
as these can never be used this way. Seems like we should
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66523
--- Comment #5 from Jack Howarth howarth.at.gcc at gmail dot com ---
This is the last remaining issue with building gcc trunk using the clang-based
assembler in Xcode 7. Should we check in Iain's proposed fix for now as a
stop-gap fix
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66523
--- Comment #4 from Jack Howarth howarth.at.gcc at gmail dot com ---
FYI, Apple's response on radar was...
This is correct behavior from the assembler. The GNU objc runtime is doing bad
things here by assuming an assembler local symbol (any
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66523
kassafari at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kassafari at gmail dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66523
--- Comment #3 from Iain Sandoe iains at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to kassafari from comment #2)
status check
you can use the patch in the short-term, but I want to check for other
solutions too.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66523
--- Comment #1 from Jack Howarth howarth.at.gcc at gmail dot com ---
Previously filed as radr://21323034, the new clang-based assembler in Xcode 7
on 10.11 fails on the NXConstStr.s file from FSF gcc 5.1
21 matches
Mail list logo
