https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80007
--- Comment #5 from PeteVine ---
The repeated full ada bootstrap was successful at the same revision, using
identical flags and GNAT 5.4.0.
On the other hand, the failing build prints two warnings during the ada part:
g-debpoo.adb: In function
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80011
Bug ID: 80011
Summary: diagnostics: trailing space in "Implicitly declared"
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69138
Xi Ruoyao changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ryxi at stu dot xidian.edu.cn
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80013
Bug ID: 80013
Summary: [ms_abi-windows x86-64] A Pointer Size 64-bit Wide or
32-bit Wide?
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80010
Bug ID: 80010
Summary: diagnostics: typo $!
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
Assignee:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80012
Bug ID: 80012
Summary: FIXME in diagnostic "%s procedure at %L is already
declared as %s procedure" from symbol.c
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69138
--- Comment #4 from Xi Ruoyao ---
Created attachment 40950
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=40950=edit
Another way to show this bug
This test case also exploits this bug.
In this lim should be the same as limlong, but g++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80014
Bug ID: 80014
Summary: [6/7 Regression] Caret missing in error message
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: diagnostic
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39239
Nicolas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||koenigni at student dot ethz.ch
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67578
Xi Ruoyao changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ryxi at stu dot xidian.edu.cn
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79841
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80011
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70909
--- Comment #49 from Mark Wielaard ---
(In reply to Pedro Alves from comment #48)
> GDB is released separately from binutils though, and GDB 8.0 is going to
> branch very soon. IWBN to have this in the binutils-gdb repo by then.
Trying to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80016
Bug ID: 80016
Summary: error is positioned incorrectly
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79956
--- Comment #23 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
(In reply to Thomas Koenig from comment #22)
> Created attachment 40952 [details]
> Patch which may fix reshape
>
> Hi, does this fix the problem with reshape?
Yes. Thank you.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78661
--- Comment #22 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to janus from comment #21)
> The testcase seems to be working properly by now, but unfortunately the
> patch breaks dtio_25.f90 (execution test), i.e. the test case from PR 78854.
What
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80009
--- Comment #4 from Walt Brainerd ---
Sorry, I cut the example down one step too many.
Please try this one. It works OK without all the stuff
related to DTIO.
BTW, I didn't mention: this is on Windows 10.
module B_write_dt_mod
implicit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70909
--- Comment #50 from Mark Wielaard ---
(In reply to Mark Wielaard from comment #49)
> (In reply to Pedro Alves from comment #48)
> > GDB is released separately from binutils though, and GDB 8.0 is going to
> > branch very soon. IWBN to have
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80009
--- Comment #3 from Walt Brainerd ---
Sorry, when trying to cut the bug to the smallest problem,
I went too far. I will start again.
On Sat, Mar 11, 2017 at 6:52 PM, dominiq at lps dot ens.fr <
gcc-bugzi...@gcc.gnu.org> wrote:
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78661
--- Comment #20 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Jerry DeLisle from comment #19)
> > Here is an updated patch, which fixes all wrong-code issues AFAICS. It
> > includes improved handling of CLASS-vs-TYPE variables (analogous to PR
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78661
--- Comment #21 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 40953
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=40953=edit
rebased patch
Here is the rebased patch. There was one conflict in libgfortran/io/write.c.
The testcase
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80015
Bug ID: 80015
Summary: auto vectorization leave scalar code even if it is
unreachable
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71399
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71399
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at redhat dot com
--- Comment #18
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78661
Bug 78661 depends on bug 78854, which changed state.
Bug 78854 Summary: [F03] DTIO namelist output not working on internal unit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78854
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78854
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80012
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||manu at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80013
--- Comment #1 from Rudy Y. ---
Disassembler 'libcrypto-41.dll' - LibreSSL x64 2.5.1 - compile by Libre
developer itself using gnuc compiler ( version 5.4.0? ):
xor ecx,ecx /* same as above! */
xor r8d,r8d /* same as above! */
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78661
--- Comment #24 from Jerry DeLisle ---
I dont think the parent is suppose to emit the Object name. What if there are
multiple comments?
should be:
I dont think the parent is suppose to emit the Object name. What if there are
multiple
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79859
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||manu at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80018
Bug ID: 80018
Summary: ICE in expand_expr_addr_expr_1, at expr.c:7790 w/
-fsanitize=object-size
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78854
--- Comment #14 from Jerry DeLisle ---
Fixed on trunk.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80017
Bug ID: 80017
Summary: [5/6/7 Regression] ICE: Max. number of generated
reload insns per insn is achieved (90)
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80009
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79985
--- Comment #3 from Alexander Monakov ---
Since r235809, in df-scan.c:df_insn_refs_collect, there's
3233 if (asm_noperands (PATTERN (insn_info->insn)) >= 0)
3234 for (unsigned i = 0; i < FIRST_PSEUDO_REGISTER; i++)
3235 if
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79985
--- Comment #4 from Alexander Monakov ---
It might have been nicer to adjust asms themselves, adding inputs/outputs for
each global reg, if we must pretend the asms implicitly read/write them. That
would allow any subsystem (df, sched-deps,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80020
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80020
Bug ID: 80020
Summary: gcc confused about aligned_alloc argument order
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79956
--- Comment #24 from Thomas Koenig ---
I think the warning about estat is a gcc bug.
Here is the function in its entirety:
void
execute_command_line_i4 (const char *command, GFC_LOGICAL_4 *wait,
GFC_INTEGER_4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78881
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jvdelisle at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80019
Bug ID: 80019
Summary: ICE in ix86_vector_duplicate_value, at
config/i386/i386.c:42584
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78661
--- Comment #23 from Jerry DeLisle ---
(In reply to janus from comment #22)
> (In reply to janus from comment #21)
> > The testcase seems to be working properly by now, but unfortunately the
> > patch breaks dtio_25.f90 (execution test), i.e.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80009
--- Comment #6 from Jerry DeLisle ---
(In reply to Walt Brainerd from comment #1)
> Forgot to add:
>
> Pls see F08 std 9.6.3(7) 2nd bullet
I see:
BULLET: If a list item of derived type in a formatted input/output statement is
not processed by
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70909
--- Comment #51 from Mark Wielaard ---
(In reply to Mark Wielaard from comment #50)
> (In reply to Mark Wielaard from comment #49)
> > (In reply to Pedro Alves from comment #48)
> > > GDB is released separately from binutils though, and GDB 8.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79856
--- Comment #4 from Roland Illig ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #3)
> So maybe we instead want a internal_error_cont () which will not end
> compilation.
I would be very happy with that.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80021
Bug ID: 80021
Summary: untranslateable diagnostic "type variant differs by "
#flag "."
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80013
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80007
--- Comment #6 from PeteVine ---
Turns out it's a miscompilation bug as I was using the same set of C(XX)FLAGS
that work fine for those other languages.
Removing the -fomit-frame-pointer flag while leaving the rest unchanged (-O3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80020
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
--- Comment #1 from Martin Sebor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80024
Bug ID: 80024
Summary: nios2: unclear wording "numeric digits" in diagnostic
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80022
Bug ID: 80022
Summary: arc: diagnostic ending in two periods
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79868
--- Comment #5 from Roland Illig ---
Same for all occurrences of the »pragma_or_attr« variable.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79908
Bill Schmidt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80023
Bug ID: 80023
Summary: missing diagnostic on aligned_alloc with invalid
alignment
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80010
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79956
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #40944|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80025
Bug ID: 80025
Summary: [5/6/7 Regression] ICE w/ -O2 (-O3, -Ofast) -g
-ftracer (infinite recursion in
rtx_equal_for_cselib_1)
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
57 matches
Mail list logo
