https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77956
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77920
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener ---
*** Bug 77956 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77956
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77962
Bug ID: 77962
Summary: [7 Regression] Bootstrap failure on x86_64-linux
starting with r241063
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77962
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77957
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Oct 13 08:29:03 2016
New Revision: 241087
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=241087&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/77957
* hooks.h (hook_tree_void_null): Declare.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77963
Bug ID: 77963
Summary: inconsistent (false?) leaks detection.
Product: gcc
Version: 6.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: sanitizer
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72832
--- Comment #9 from vehre at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: vehre
Date: Thu Oct 13 08:51:21 2016
New Revision: 241088
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=241088&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
gcc/fortran/ChangeLog:
2016-09-01 Andre Vehreschild
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72832
--- Comment #10 from vehre at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Waiting one week before backporting to gcc-6.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77962
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |segher at gcc dot
gnu.org
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77959
--- Comment #7 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #6)
> Maybe turning on RTL checking will find the problem is located.
Indeed, the rtl-checking enabled build says:
internal compiler error: RTL check: expected code 'me
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77959
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #8
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77959
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77943
--- Comment #7 from Martin Liška ---
Author: marxin
Date: Thu Oct 13 10:06:35 2016
New Revision: 241090
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=241090&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Do not merge BBs with a different EH landing pads (PR
PR tree-opt
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68391
Alexander Volkov changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||a.volkov at rusbitech dot ru
--- Comm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77943
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[5/6/7 Regression] |[5/6 Regression]
|Optim
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65856
Alexander Volkov changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||a.volkov at rusbitech dot ru
--- Comm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65856
--- Comment #12 from Alexander Volkov ---
Sorry, it should be
struct B : A {
virtual void f() final;
};
in the first example.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64279
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||manu at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77431
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77946
--- Comment #10 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Oct 13 10:42:36 2016
New Revision: 241094
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=241094&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c/77946
* tree.h (FALLTHROUGH_LABEL_P): Use private_fl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77558
--- Comment #11 from Tom de Vries ---
Author: vries
Date: Thu Oct 13 11:40:33 2016
New Revision: 241103
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=241103&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Revert backport "Remove RECORD_TYPE special-casing in
std_canonical_va_lis
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77946
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66284
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to David Krauss from comment #0)
> This is not conforming.
Hmm, I think that's debatable.
[func.wrap.func.con] says:
Throws: shall not throw exceptions if f’s target is a callable object
pa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77964
Bug ID: 77964
Summary: [7 Regression] Linux kernel firmware loader
miscompiled
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77826
--- Comment #9 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Thu Oct 13 12:15:38 2016
New Revision: 241108
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=241108&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2016-10-13 Richard Biener
PR middle-end/77826
* gen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77964
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77964
--- Comment #1 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
markus@x4 linux % gcc --save-temps -Wp,-MD,drivers/base/.firmware_class.o.d
-nostdinc -isystem /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/7.0.0/include
-I./arch/x86/include -I./arch/x86/include/generated/uapi
-I.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77965
Bug ID: 77965
Summary: -Wduplicated-cond should find duplicated condition /
identical expressions of form "a || a" or "a && a"
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77964
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77966
Bug ID: 77966
Summary: Corrupt function with -fsanitize-coverage=trace-pc
Product: gcc
Version: 6.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77964
--- Comment #3 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #2)
> Can you bisect? Suspect changes might be the shrink wrapping changes from
> last night - r241063 and r241059-r241061.
It is much older issue. Even gcc from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77917
--- Comment #7 from PeteVine ---
BTW, I sincerely hope `--with-build-config=bootstrap-lto` is not derailed by
the presence of `-flto` among environment C(XX)FLAGS, as otherwise it
definitely makes sense for configure to always sanitize those flag
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77964
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77967
Bug ID: 77967
Summary: trying to add a method to a template alias triggers an
internal compiler error
Product: gcc
Version: 5.4.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77964
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinsk
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77966
Denis Vlasenko changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vda.linux at googlemail dot com
--- Com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77966
--- Comment #2 from Denis Vlasenko ---
Without -fsanitize-coverage=trace-pc, the second, redundant check
"snic->wq_count<=1?" is not generated. This eliminates the hanging "impossible"
code path:
:
0: 8b 07 mov(%rdi),%
ad of
+===GNAT BUG DETECTED==+
| 7.0.0 20161013 (experimental) [trunk revision 221942] (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)
GCC error:|
| in self_referential_size, at stor-layout.c:187 |
which is
/* We shouldn't have true vari
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77968
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |7.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69566
--- Comment #5 from Paul Thomas ---
Created attachment 39805
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=39805&action=edit
Fix for the PR
The attached fixes the testcase in the comment and more besides. I think that
some of the fix is u
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77969
Bug ID: 77969
Summary: go testsuite shows ICEs and runtime errors with -flto
[-g]
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prior
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66170
Sergey Vidyuk changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||sir.vestnik at gmail dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77961
--- Comment #2 from vehre at gcc dot gnu.org ---
This is no regression, because before the patch mentioned in comment #1, the
construct of having allocatable components in derived types was flagged as
error. Now this construct is supported for der
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77937
--- Comment #11 from Bill Schmidt ---
Author: wschmidt
Date: Thu Oct 13 15:34:22 2016
New Revision: 241125
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=241125&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2016-10-13 Bill Schmidt
PR tree-optimization/77937
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77937
--- Comment #12 from Bill Schmidt ---
Just saw your request to include the test case. I will do this but may ask you
to review the dejagnu bits for accuracy for your target, as these don't fire on
arches I regularly build for.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77967
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |6.3
Summary|[6/7 Regression] I
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77967
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77968
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77968
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77963
--- Comment #1 from Kostya Serebryany ---
lsan does not work with ptrace.
There is https://github.com/google/sanitizers/issues/728 for it.
We don't have plans to fix it, but the change I sent for review yesterday
causes lsan to complain loudly
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77970
Bug ID: 77970
Summary: inconsistent and unhelpful -Wformat warning for %lc
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66284
--- Comment #2 from David Krauss ---
The converting constructor requirements also say more explicitly,
shall not throw exceptions when f is a function pointer
or a reference_wrapper for some T.
Probably the copy constructor should be worded
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66284
--- Comment #3 from David Krauss ---
… Woops, that f is the function parameter, not the target. So it's not a
conflicting requirement, but it could be a template for fixing the the copy
constructor constraint.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77970
--- Comment #1 from joseph at codesourcery dot com ---
I think the correct logic would be something like: if the argument is for
a standard typedef, and the format doesn't correspond exactly to that
typedef (or one differing only by sign, e.g.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77971
Bug ID: 77971
Summary: ICE at -O0 in make_decl_rtl, at varasm.c:1310
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77971
--- Comment #1 from Gerhard Steinmetz
---
For completeness, compiles without variable "g" :
$ cat z3.f90
module m
contains
function f()
f = 1
entry g()
g = 2
end
end
$ gfortran-7-20161009 -O0 -c z3.f90
Problem detecte
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77972
Bug ID: 77972
Summary: ICE on broken character continuation with -Wall etc.
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77973
Bug ID: 77973
Summary: ICE in scan_omp_1_op, at omp-low.c:3841
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77962
--- Comment #2 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Author: segher
Date: Thu Oct 13 18:25:15 2016
New Revision: 241135
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=241135&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Create the *logue in the same order as before (PR77962)
PR77962 sho
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77974
Bug ID: 77974
Summary: m68k bootstrap failure due to
-Werror=implicit-fallthrough
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prior
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77974
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77971
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-invalid-code
Status|UN
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66284
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Created attachment 39806
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=39806&action=edit
Patch to remove special-case for reference_wrapper.
This patch makes it work as desired. We need to fix 3-4 t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77972
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-invalid-code
Status|UN
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77973
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77974
--- Comment #2 from Andreas Schwab ---
I think this is intented:
diff --git a/gcc/config/m68k/m68k.c b/gcc/config/m68k/m68k.c
index a104193c23..0eb1528079 100644
--- a/gcc/config/m68k/m68k.c
+++ b/gcc/config/m68k/m68k.c
@@ -4546,6 +4546,7 @@ m68
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77975
Bug ID: 77975
Summary: [6 / 7 Regression] Missed optimization for some small
constants
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: minor
P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77974
--- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek ---
Nice. Will you commit the patch? Thanks.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77975
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
Component|c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77937
--- Comment #13 from Bill Schmidt ---
Author: wschmidt
Date: Thu Oct 13 19:50:41 2016
New Revision: 241139
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=241139&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2016-10-13 Bill Schmidt
PR tree-optimization/77937
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77964
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski ---
That is change:
extern struct builtin_fw __start_builtin_fw[];
extern struct builtin_fw __end_builtin_fw[];
static bool fw_get_builtin_firmware(struct firmware *fw, const char *name,
void *buf, size_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77917
--- Comment #8 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to PeteVine from comment #7)
> BTW, I sincerely hope `--with-build-config=bootstrap-lto` is not derailed by
> the presence of `-flto` among environment C(XX)FLAGS, as otherwise it
> definitely makes
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77917
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77977
Bug ID: 77977
Summary: stage3 bootstrap error in libgo on x86_64: cannot stat
'stubs.o'
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77977
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at redhat dot com
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77977
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77962
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77964
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
You don't need it for both.
struct builtin_fw *b_fw = __start_builtin_fw;
asm ("" : "+r" (b_fw));
for (; b_fw != __end_builtin_fw; b_fw++) {
should be enough. And indeed, without that it is undefined b
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77964
--- Comment #8 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #7)
> You don't need it for both.
> struct builtin_fw *b_fw = __start_builtin_fw;
> asm ("" : "+r" (b_fw));
> for (; b_fw != __end_builtin_fw; b_fw++) {
> should
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64567
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
--- Comment #3 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77917
--- Comment #10 from PeteVine ---
Yeah, I began suspecting as much yesterday so I left it running overnight on
ARM. It managed to get to stage comparison but failed due to many differences.
But not before I'd got impatient in the morning and did
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77976
Tomasz Kamiński changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tomaszkam at gmail dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52472
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59962
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Does this work now?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77972
--- Comment #2 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
related to/duplicate of pr68040?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68040
--- Comment #6 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
related to/duplicate of pr77972?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71912
--- Comment #7 from Martin Sebor ---
Author: msebor
Date: Thu Oct 13 22:26:36 2016
New Revision: 241143
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=241143&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/71912 - [6/7 regression] flexible array in struct in union rejected
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71912
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[6/7 regression] flexible |[6 regression] flexible
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69566
--- Comment #6 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
Beware of pr30617 in the test in comment 4! Otherwise the patch seems to work
as expected.
Thanks,
Dominique
> Le 13 oct. 2016 à 16:14, pault at gcc dot gnu.org
> a écrit :
>
> https://gcc.gnu.or
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77964
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77964
--- Comment #10 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Markus Trippelsdorf from comment #9)
> Is subtracting undefined, too?
Yes. Comparing two unrelated arrays or subtracting them is undefined.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60818
John Paul Adrian Glaubitz changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||glaubitz at physik dot
fu-be
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60818
--- Comment #13 from John Paul Adrian Glaubitz ---
Created attachment 39807
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=39807&action=edit
Pre-processed source for tools/qtextboundaryfinder.cpp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77964
--- Comment #11 from Marc Glisse ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #5)
> Looks like a kernel issue. An asm ("", "+r"(x)); is needed in the source for
> __start_builtin_fw and __end_builtin_fw
Shouldn't we recommend "+g" instead of "+r"
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77972
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77978
Bug ID: 77978
Summary: stop codes misinterpreted in both f2003 and f2008
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Componen
=/usr/local/gcc-trunk/libexec/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/7.0.0/lto-wrapper
Target: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu
Configured with: ../gcc-source-trunk/configure --enable-languages=c,c++,lto
--prefix=/usr/local/gcc-trunk --disable-bootstrap
Thread model: posix
gcc version 7.0.0 20161013 (experimental) [trunk revision
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36312
Riccardo Mutschlechner changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||riccardo at cs dot wisc.edu
---
/kota/opt/gcc
--program-suffix=-7.0 --disable-multilib --enable-languages=c
thred model: posix
gcc version 7.0.0 20161013 (experimental) (GCC)
using built-in specs.
clang version 3.8.0-2ubuntu4 (tags/RELEASE_380/final)
Target: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu
Thread model: posix
InstalledDir: /usr/bin
Found candid
1 - 100 of 106 matches
Mail list logo
