https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81891
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||fdumont at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52130
--- Comment #3 from Richard Smith ---
The diagnostic in #1 is not only wrong for this case, it's also a rejects-valid
in the case where the underlying types match. I've filed
https://gcc.gnu.org/PR81895 for that.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81894
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||documentation
Target|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81897
Bug ID: 81897
Summary: spurious -Wmaybe-uninitialized warning
Product: gcc
Version: 7.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81572
Peter Bergner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81891
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
I think this might be all we need to do to fix it:
--- a/libstdc++-v3/include/bits/hashtable.h
+++ b/libstdc++-v3/include/bits/hashtable.h
@@ -973,17 +973,8 @@ _GLIBCXX_BEGIN_NAMESPACE_VERSION
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81893
--- Comment #1 from Ian Lance Taylor ---
Did you test powerpc64 little endian?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81895
Bug ID: 81895
Summary: gcc rejects out-of-line definition of enum member of
class template under -pedantic-errors
Product: gcc
Version: 7.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50169
Ville Voutilainen changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81794
--- Comment #2 from David Malcolm ---
Please can you turn it into a patch that contains both the fix *and* the new
testcase? (e.g. gcc.dg/pragma-diag-8.c)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69834
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79072
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81893
--- Comment #2 from seurer at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Yes, it compiles OK on LE.
Note that I saw the errors on both power7 and power8 BE systems and using
different versions of gcc to build.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53037
--- Comment #27 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to Rainer Orth from comment #26)
> Several of the new tests FAIL on Solaris/SPARC (both 32 and 64-bit):
>
> +FAIL: g++.dg/pr53037-2.C -std=gnu++11 (test for warnings, line 16)
> +FAIL:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81894
Bug ID: 81894
Summary: Typo in x86 built-in function list
Product: gcc
Version: 7.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: web
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80684
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80529
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81827
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org |pault at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80657
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |pault at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81893
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53037
--- Comment #29 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to r...@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de from comment #28)
> > --- Comment #27 from H.J. Lu ---
>
> > What are error messages?
>
> None, the warnings are simply missing.
>
> Rainer
Sparc defines
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80529
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81893
--- Comment #3 from Ian Lance Taylor ---
Thanks. I think https://golang.org/cl/57110 should fix the problem.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81896
Bug ID: 81896
Summary: omp target enter data not recognized
Product: gcc
Version: 7.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81514
--- Comment #4 from David Malcolm ---
Author: dmalcolm
Date: Fri Aug 18 18:12:47 2017
New Revision: 251186
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=251186=gcc=rev
Log:
C++: fix ordering of missing std #include suggestion (PR c++/81514)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81514
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81891
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Fri Aug 18 17:46:57 2017
New Revision: 251185
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=251185=gcc=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/81891 fix double-free in hashtable constructor
PR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69834
--- Comment #16 from Paul Thomas ---
Dear Jerry,
Thanks for your confirmation of my feeling about this. I have enough on my
plate as it is!
Cheers
Paul
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53037
--- Comment #28 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #27 from H.J. Lu ---
> What are error messages?
None, the warnings are simply missing.
Rainer
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81893
--- Comment #4 from ian at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: ian
Date: Fri Aug 18 20:17:26 2017
New Revision: 251188
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=251188=gcc=rev
Log:
PR go/81893
runtime: only use PPC GNU/Linux register code on
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44283
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||error-recovery
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53037
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ro at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #26
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81891
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80567
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81794
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81891
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||8.0
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81488
--- Comment #6 from Bill Schmidt ---
Patch submitted: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-08/msg01145.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46805
--- Comment #5 from David Malcolm ---
Author: dmalcolm
Date: Fri Aug 18 23:56:28 2017
New Revision: 251192
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=251192=gcc=rev
Log:
jit: fix segfault with autovectorization (PR tree-optimization/46805)
libgccjit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80210
--- Comment #8 from Peter Bergner ---
Fixed on trunk. I'm testing backports to the open release branches and will
commit them after the trunk patch has aged a bit (next week?).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19794
Bug 19794 depends on bug 70879, which changed state.
Bug 70879 Summary: Missed jump threading opportunity with multiple != conditions
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70879
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70879
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Macleod ---
On 08/18/2017 06:13 PM, law at redhat dot com wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70879
>
> Jeffrey A. Law changed:
>
> What|Removed |Added
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80210
--- Comment #7 from Peter Bergner ---
Author: bergner
Date: Fri Aug 18 23:41:41 2017
New Revision: 251190
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=251190=gcc=rev
Log:
gcc/
PR target/80210
* config/rs6000/rs6000.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81850
--- Comment #1 from Daniel Santos ---
I have a patch that I've tested and will be submitting it shortly (I can't
change the assigned to field yet).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53037
--- Comment #30 from H. Peter Anvin ---
On August 18, 2017 3:52:12 PM CDT, "hjl.tools at gmail dot com"
wrote:
>https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53037
>
>--- Comment #29 from H.J. Lu ---
>(In reply to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80164
--- Comment #15 from Jerry DeLisle ---
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Fri Aug 18 21:36:50 2017
New Revision: 251189
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=251189=gcc=rev
Log:
2017-08-18 Jerry DeLisle
Backport from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80164
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47413
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70879
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81898
Bug ID: 81898
Summary: Issue with polymorphic container class
Product: gcc
Version: 7.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81897
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Known to work|
_64-pc-linux-gnu
Configured with: ../../gcc-mainline/configure --prefix=/pkgs/gcc-mainline
--enable-checking=release --enable-languages=c --disable-multilib
--enable-gather-detailed-mem-stats
Thread model: posix
gcc version 8.0.0 20170818 (experimental) [trunk revision 251188] (
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81835
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely ---
That should point back to the cxxabi.h file, where you started.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81884
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81884
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Priority|P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66639
--- Comment #11 from Benjamin Buch ---
Also test case #3 doesn't work if you declare the function return type auto:
constexpr auto foo ()
{
static_assert (0 == __builtin_strcmp (__func__, "foo"), "#1");
static_assert (0 == __builtin_strcmp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81877
--- Comment #10 from Richard Biener ---
So I think what safelen > 1 (and thus ivdep) guarantees is that (even if the
loop doesn't iterate) we can peel any iteration before or after the loop which
effectively means all references in one iteration
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81835
--- Comment #3 from Chris Johns ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #2)
> (In reply to Chris Johns from comment #0)
> > Tiny issue.
> >
> > Looking over cxxabi.h I noticed a link in a comment about __cxa_demangle is
> > not valid
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81884
Bug ID: 81884
Summary: Invalid code generation with zero size arrays or
flexible array members
Product: gcc
Version: 7.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81885
Bug ID: 81885
Summary: operator-> not checked by -D_GLIBCXX_ASSERTIONS
Product: gcc
Version: 7.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81884
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
Created attachment 42000
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=42000=edit
patch in testing
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81886
Bug ID: 81886
Summary: Means to determine at runtime foffload targets
specified at compile time
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81886
--- Comment #1 from Tom de Vries ---
This is the initial commit to gomp-4_0-branch :
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-08/msg01264.html .
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81886
--- Comment #3 from Tom de Vries ---
(In reply to Tom de Vries from comment #2)
These are all related to timing issues. Maybe not related to the patch.
> FAIL: libgomp.oacc-c-c++-common/lib-74.c -foffload=nvptx-none -O0
> execution test
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81847
--- Comment #4 from Valentine ---
Created attachment 42002
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=42002=edit
code to reproduce ICE
I reduced (thanks to suggestions above and CReduce) this to the attached
example.
g++ -w -flto -O3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81268
--- Comment #4 from Georg-Johann Lay ---
(In reply to Eric Gallager from comment #3)
> Redoing https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/2017-08/msg01469.html
I guess due to some server crash / glitch?
> New Revision: 251085
>
> URL:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53037
--- Comment #24 from hjl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: hjl
Date: Fri Aug 18 09:38:38 2017
New Revision: 251180
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=251180=gcc=rev
Log:
Add warn_if_not_aligned attribute
Add warn_if_not_aligned attribute as
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81877
--- Comment #11 from Alexander Monakov ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #10)
> Now - for refs that have an invariant address in such loop the interleaving
> effectively means that they are independent even in the same iteration.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81754
Georg-Johann Lay changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||build
Priority|P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81268
--- Comment #5 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to Georg-Johann Lay from comment #4)
> (In reply to Eric Gallager from comment #3)
> > Redoing https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/2017-08/msg01469.html
>
> I guess due to some server crash / glitch?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53037
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81886
--- Comment #4 from Tom de Vries ---
(In reply to Tom de Vries from comment #2)
> FAIL: libgomp.oacc-c-c++-common/parallel-dims.c -foffload=nvptx-none -O0
> (test for excess errors)
> FAIL: libgomp.oacc-c-c++-common/parallel-dims.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81847
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81886
--- Comment #2 from Tom de Vries ---
Created attachment 42001
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=42001=edit
trunk patch
This is a version of the patch for trunk.
It introduces some failures for c and c++, but that might be
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81890
Bug ID: 81890
Summary: asm memory constraints are difficult and not well
documented
Product: gcc
Version: 8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81847
--- Comment #6 from Martin Liška ---
Created attachment 42004
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=42004=edit
A bit smaller test-case
Smaller test-cast which needs to add --param lto-min-partition=1.
Problem is following, we
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71003
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81877
--- Comment #13 from Alexander Monakov ---
> More rigorously defining the semantic of loop->safelen (the
> middle-end term) is necessary nevertheless. I believe omp ordered
> doesn't have any middle-end representation?
Except on nvptx, 'omp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81890
Alan Modra changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||documentation
#2 from Benjamin Buch ---
Bug does still exist in:
$ g++ --version
g++ (GCC) 8.0.0 20170818 (experimental)
Copyright (C) 2017 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
This is free software; see the source for copying conditions. There is NO
warranty; not even for MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81891
Bug ID: 81891
Summary: heap-use-after-free if inserting element in
std::unordered_map(InputIt, InputIt) throws
Product: gcc
Version: 7.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50169
--- Comment #4 from Ville Voutilainen ---
I have sent this to Core for consideration.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81327
--- Comment #1 from Ville Voutilainen ---
Note that this currently blocks building Qt with gcc 8. We could work around it
by turning our void* casts to char* casts, but we have a preference for fixing
this problem in the compiler.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81885
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
In fact it's the idiomatic way to get a real pointer from any kind of smart
pointer, e.g. fancy pointers used by allocators (which don't necessarily have a
get member function).
There's even a proposal to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81877
--- Comment #12 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Fri, 18 Aug 2017, amonakov at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81877
>
> --- Comment #11 from Alexander Monakov ---
> (In reply to Richard Biener from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81888
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81887
--- Comment #1 from Richard Biener ---
See also PR81877 for some discussion and an example where SLP vectorization can
break 'ordered'.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49224
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81889
Bug ID: 81889
Summary: [7 Regression] bogus warnings with
-Wmaybe-uninitialized -O3
Product: gcc
Version: 7.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47256
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51234
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51545
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81884
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #42000|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50169
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
EDG rejects it too:
"gr.cc", line 3: error: expected a declaration
new struct A {{ }};
^
"gr.cc", line 3: error: type definition is not allowed
new struct A {{ }};
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50456
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49224
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||rejects-valid
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26748
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81889
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49531
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||rejects-valid
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81805
Tom de Vries changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81805
Tom de Vries changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
1 - 100 of 127 matches
Mail list logo