--- Comment #16 from patchapp at dberlin dot org 2007-03-13 07:30 ---
Subject: Bug number PR30643
A patch for this bug has been added to the patch tracker.
The mailing list url for the patch is
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-03/msg00815.html
--
--- Comment #6 from aoliva at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-13 07:56 ---
On it.
--
aoliva at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned
--- Comment #5 from brooks at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-13 08:11 ---
I believe that all of the nonstandard intrinsics have now been documented in
4.2 and 4.3, and thus I am closing this bug as fixed.
--
brooks at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #6 from brooks at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-13 08:47 ---
This bug was erroneously closed. The following intrinsics are undocumented in
4.2:
INT2, SHORT
INT8, LONG
MCLOCK
MCLOCK8
SECOND
The relevant bits of intrinsic.c:
add_sym_1 (int2, ELEMENTAL, ACTUAL_NO,
--
brooks at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |brooks at gcc dot gnu dot
|dot org
--- Comment #7 from brooks at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-13 09:00 ---
Relevant pieces of trans-intrinsic.c:
/* Integer conversions are handled separately to make sure we get the
correct rounding mode. */
case GFC_ISYM_INT:
case GFC_ISYM_INT2:
case
As in the subject line; this feature was added (thanks, Paul!) but the
documentation is still pending.
--
Summary: %VAL and related features need to be documented.
Product: gcc
Version: 4.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: documentation
--
brooks at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |brooks at gcc dot gnu dot
|dot org
--- Comment #7 from patchapp at dberlin dot org 2007-03-13 09:14 ---
Subject: Bug number PR29906
A patch for this bug has been added to the patch tracker.
The mailing list url for the patch is
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-03/msg00817.html
--
--- Comment #8 from brooks at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-13 09:15 ---
Relevant parts of libgfortran/clock.c:
GFC_INTEGER_4
mclock (void)
{
#ifdef HAVE_CLOCK
return (GFC_INTEGER_4) clock ();
#else
return (GFC_INTEGER_4) -1;
#endif
}
GFC_INTEGER_8
mclock8 (void)
{
#ifdef HAVE_CLOCK
When compiled with gcc version 4.3.0 20070309, the following code
#include math.h
#include stdio.h
int main()
{
__complex__ double x;
__real__ x = -1.0;
__imag__ x = 0.0;
__complex__ double t = __builtin_clog(x);
double tmp = 0.5 * (__imag__ t);
x = __builtin_cexpi(tmp);
--- Comment #6 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-13 09:30 ---
How tracking _two_ value ranges for signed quantities with undefined overflow.
One assuming it is undefined and one with wrapping semantics. Whenever you
fold
something using the value range you warn if the folding
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-13 10:20 ---
It works for me on x86_64 and i686 with 4.0.0, 4.1.0 and 4.1.2. So this looks
like a target issue.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
Keywords|
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-13 10:26 ---
This has been fixed on the branch by the patch for PR30274.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #42 from baldrick at free dot fr 2007-03-13 10:30 ---
Subject: Re: [4.3 regression] ACATS cxh1001 fails
It is not possible for a pointer value to be uninitialized. The language
requires all pointers to be default initialized to null.
I mean the thing that pointer
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-13 10:30 ---
It's a target issue. Darwin is broken that it doesn't set TARGET_C99_FUNCTIONS
but still appears to have cexp. Your testcase is also invalid for this reason,
you should not use __builtin_cexpi if neither sincos
--- Comment #2 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2007-03-13 10:58 ---
Subject: Re: __builtin_cexpi is broken on Darwin
you should not use __builtin_cexpi if neither sincos nor cexp is available.
Yes indeed, but an ICE is certainly not the best way to say it!
Now I have tested
--- Comment #23 from martin dot jansa at mk dot cvut dot cz 2007-03-13
11:45 ---
(In reply to comment #22)
This is a bug in the gentoo distro ask them to fix how they do multilib.
so results are (with gcc-4.3)
#include_next stdio.h - doesn't work
#include stdio.h - doesn't work
--- Comment #43 from kenner at vlsi1 dot ultra dot nyu dot edu 2007-03-13
12:33 ---
Subject: Re: [4.3 regression] ACATS cxh1001 fails
I think I now understand: I thought the problem we were discussing was
how to obtain correctness (which seems to be easy using local checks)
while
--- Comment #10 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2007-03-13 12:56 ---
The problem seems to come from a broken/unavailable __builtin_cexpi,
see PR31161.
My understanding is that __builtin_cexpi and __builtin_sincos are twin
objects(?). Now I see in gcc/tree-ssa-math-opts.c:
...
--- Comment #11 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-13 13:22
---
Because if TARGET_C99_FUNCTIONS is set we can expand __builtin_cexpi by using
cexp(). The ICE you get in PR30969 shows that TARGET_C99_FUNCTIONS is _not_
set:
/* We can expand via the C99 cexp function.
--- Comment #12 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-13 13:26
---
Now,
2007-02-05 Roger Sayle [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* fold-const.c (fold_unary) REAL_PART: Test for availability of
BUILT_IN_COS before simplifying REAL_PART(CEXPI)) to COS.
IMAG_PART:
--- Comment #7 from krebbel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-13 13:26 ---
ICE can be observed on s390 and s390x as well.
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2007-03/msg00357.html
--
krebbel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-13 13:39 ---
Created an attachment (id=13199)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=13199action=view)
patch for a better error
Can you check if the attached patch gives a more reasonable error?
--
--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-13 13:53 ---
With a cross compiler to powerpc-apple-darwin7 I now get for the testcase:
gcc ./cc1 -quiet t.i
t.i: In function 'main':
t.i:13: warning: incompatible implicit declaration of built-in function
'printf'
t.i:12:
real r
do r=1.0,2.0
print*,r
enddo
end
gives
legacy.f:2.10:
do r=1.0,2.0
1
Warning: Obsolete: REAL DO loop iterator at (1)
which is ok, however
do r=1.0,2.0
print*,r
enddo
end
compiles without warning!
the same for
The output from the attached code looks wrong, as if the derived type
components are not SAVEd.
-output-
[EMAIL PROTECTED] bugtest]$ gfortran -v
Using built-in specs.
Target: i686-pc-linux-gnu
Configured with: ../gcc-4.3-20070302/configure
--- Comment #2 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-13 14:33 ---
Andrew wrote:
--
it is obvious from the tree dump, what is going on:
static struct foo_type f_a = {};
f_a.mv.data = 0B;
So save is done correctly but allocatables
--- Comment #13 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2007-03-13 14:48 ---
The ICE you get in PR30969 shows that TARGET_C99_FUNCTIONS is _not_ set:
Is there a way to test it once the building directory is gone? In
gcc/config/rs6000/darwin.h I read:
...
/* Old versions of Mac OS/Darwin
--- Comment #1 from sfilippone at uniroma2 dot it 2007-03-13 14:25 ---
Created an attachment (id=13200)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=13200action=view)
test case
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31163
--
burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #6 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-13 16:05 ---
I think this is confirmed, we can try to do better.
--
manu at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #12 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-13 16:12
---
Created an attachment (id=13201)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=13201action=view)
patch which I need to retest and fix the last regression
--
--- Comment #6 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-13 16:12 ---
So the conclusion is that we should emit a warning for the undefinedness.
--
manu at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #7 from spark at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-13 16:15 ---
tree-nrv code doesn't see:
bb 2:
retval.type = 0;
because it only looks at GIMPLE_MODIFY with the operand 0 as the return value.
In this case, there's GIMPLE_MODIFY of the component of the return value
hence not
--
dnovillo at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|dnovillo at redhat dot com |
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |dnovillo at gcc
--- Comment #7 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-13 16:22 ---
and as such, this is a duplicate of bug 16351.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 16351 ***
--
manu at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #9 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-13 16:22 ---
*** Bug 30368 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
manu at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #6 from law at redhat dot com 2007-03-13 16:33 ---
Subject: Re: [4.1/4.2/4.3 Regression] ICE with
computed goto and constants
On Mon, 2007-03-12 at 23:46 +, spark at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
--- Comment #4 from spark at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-12
Hi,
There is a problem when using slots trackable from Boost with GCC 4.1 - I
don't know whether this is a GCC problem or a Boost problem, but it affects us
(OpenWengo) on both Fedora Core and Feisty, since both distribute gcc 4.1.
I'm attaching a test case - the expected output is:
create A
--- Comment #1 from dave dot neary at wengo dot com 2007-03-13 16:49
---
Created an attachment (id=13202)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=13202action=view)
Test case to show problem with Boost and GCC 4.1
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31164
--- Comment #2 from dave dot neary at wengo dot com 2007-03-13 16:50
---
Additional bug tracker entries have been created against Ubuntu:
https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gcc-4.1/+bug/75724 and OpenSuse:
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=228524
And against Boost:
--- Comment #8 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-13 16:52 ---
Use get_base_address (GIMPLE_STMT_OPERAND (stmt, 0)) == result. (Verify if
get_base_address does not return NULL, if it's the result_decl, otherwise
replicate the loop therein).
--
--
hp at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
Last
--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-13 17:54 ---
And this duplicate doesn't add any useful information on top of what was
entered
into the novell bugzilla. Nobody here is going to wade through boost to
understand what is going on here.
--
--- Comment #9 from spark at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-13 18:29 ---
How does this one look ? If it looks reasonable, I'll start the testing with
the mainline.
Index: tree-nrv.c
===
--- tree-nrv.c (revision 122871)
+++
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||build
Summary|build failure with --enable-|[4.2/4.3
--- Comment #1 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-13 18:55 ---
I believe this is the proper fix:
Index: cfglayout.c
===
--- cfglayout.c (revision 122858)
+++ cfglayout.c (working copy)
@@ -697,7 +697,6 @@
While compiling groff with latest snapshot from GCC 4.2 branch. I am getting
this error with the attached preprocessed file with optimization turned on (O2,
O1 ,Os are ones I tried). At -O0 it works ok
The error from assembler
/tmp/ccOeOEGl.s: Assembler messages:
/tmp/ccOeOEGl.s:5826: Error:
Forgive me if this is reported/fixed already; after many consecutive hours of
debugging I currently do not have the courage to search through the list of
bugs.
Please, try this code (tested on 32bit GNU/Linux), compiled with:
gcc -std=c99 -Wall -Wextra -o wtf wtf.c
#include stdio.h
int
--- Comment #1 from raj dot khem at gmail dot com 2007-03-13 19:59 ---
Created an attachment (id=13203)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=13203action=view)
testcase
This is the preprocessed testcase.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31165
--- Comment #10 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-13 20:10
---
That looks reasonable.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30590
--- Comment #11 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-13 20:12
---
(In reply to comment #10)
Thomas, it's a bit kludgy, but why not add a constant expression = 1, if dim
is
not present?
Hi Paul,
unless I'm mistaken, this would also change the rank of the
function to 0,
--- Comment #1 from schwab at suse dot de 2007-03-13 20:22 ---
0x8000 is of type unsigned int, negating it gives an unsigned int of the
same value, converted to long long still gives the same positive value. On the
other hand 2147483648 is of type long long (in C99) because it does
--- Comment #13 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-13 21:07
---
I think this patch causes the regression reported in PR 31165. copy_node is
incorrect as it will even copy decls, I think copy_node should be replaced with
unshare_expr instead.
--
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot
|
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-13 21:11 ---
Reducing, I think this was introduced by the patch which fixed PR 30108.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31165
--
spark at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |spark at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org
The source below is meant to return an int32_t that is the result of rounding
the upper 32 bits of an __int128_t, where rounding pays attention to the bits
that have been discarded and the low bit of what is kept. Since it's an ICE,
the details are probably irrelevant.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] cat
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-13 21:35 ---
Reduced testcase:
class string {
char *ptr;
int len;
int sz;
};
class cset { } _cset_init;
string an_empty_string;
void f(string = an_empty_string);
void
h (void )
{
f();
}
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot
--- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-13 21:36 ---
I think this only shows up with section anchors.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31165
--- Comment #14 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-13 21:40
---
(In reply to comment #13)
I think this patch causes the regression reported in PR 31165. copy_node is
incorrect as it will even copy decls, I think copy_node should be replaced
with
unshare_expr instead.
A
--- Comment #5 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-13 21:40 ---
A quick patch which I am testing right now:
Index: cp/call.c
===
--- cp/call.c (revision 122871)
+++ cp/call.c (working copy)
@@ -4671,7 +4671,7 @@
--- Comment #15 from mark at codesourcery dot com 2007-03-13 21:46 ---
Subject: Re: [4.0/4.1 Regression] internal compiler error:
in make_decl_rtl, at varasm.c:890
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
--- Comment #14 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-13 21:40
--- Comment #8 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-13 21:48 ---
pr23237.c on powerpc-linux-gnu at -O3 and above ICEs the same way.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-13 22:00 ---
Confirmed. C testcase:
typedef int int32_t;
int32_t round32hi(const __int128_t arg)
{
const int SHIFT = 96;
const int mshift = 96;
const __int128_t M = (~(__int128_t)0)mshift;
const __int128_t L =
--- Comment #12 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-13 22:16
---
Another testcase but it is not fixed by my patch as I did not fix the other
side:
int main(void)
{
double b = 234.0;
long long c;
double d = b;
__builtin_memcpy(c, b, sizeof(double));
long long e = c;
--- Comment #2 from roberto dot gordo at gmail dot com 2007-03-13 22:27
---
I do not agree at all. Please, read.
So 0x8000 is unsigned because does not fit on an int type. That's OK. If
negating it gives an unsigned int of the same value, then, how do you explain
that the
--- Comment #3 from schwab at suse dot de 2007-03-13 22:35 ---
(In reply to comment #2)
So 0x8000 is unsigned because does not fit on an int type. That's OK. If
negating it gives an unsigned int of the same value, then, how do you explain
that the following code prints n1 =
--- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-13 22:35 ---
unsigned is never promoted, it always stays unsigned.
So -0x8000 == 0x8000 :).
Try adding ULL (or UL) if you want an unsigned long long (unsigned long)
constant.
--
--- Comment #3 from spark at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-13 22:57 ---
This is somewhat complicated.
The extra type cast causes
different code paths to be taken.
In particular, in finish_call_expr() in cp/semantics.c:
if (processing_template_decl)
{
if
--- Comment #1 from danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-13 23:21 ---
Subject: Bug 31123
Author: danglin
Date: Tue Mar 13 23:21:40 2007
New Revision: 122886
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=122886
Log:
PR target/31123
* pa.md (vdepi_ior): Don't
--- Comment #2 from danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-13 23:24 ---
Subject: Bug 31123
Author: danglin
Date: Tue Mar 13 23:23:54 2007
New Revision: 122887
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=122887
Log:
PR target/31123
Fix ChangeLog entry.
--- Comment #8 from spark at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-13 23:43 ---
I believe all issues are fixed at this point,
except for the extra error message of can't find a register.
But since it's accompanied with a proper error message,
I don't think this is a problem anymore.
$gcc -fPIC
--- Comment #1 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-13 23:49
---
Subject: Bug 30899
Author: mmitchel
Date: Tue Mar 13 23:48:49 2007
New Revision: 122888
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=122888
Log:
PR bootstrap/30899
* Make-lang.in
--- Comment #2 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-13 23:50
---
Fixed in 4.2.0, 4.3.0.
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #11 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-13 23:50 ---
Subject: Bug 12448
Author: tromey
Date: Tue Mar 13 23:50:42 2007
New Revision: 122889
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=122889
Log:
2007-03-13 David Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR
--- Comment #3 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-13 23:51
---
Subject: Bug 30899
Author: mmitchel
Date: Tue Mar 13 23:51:07 2007
New Revision: 122890
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=122890
Log:
PR bootstrap/30899
* Make-lang.in
--- Comment #2 from jconner at apple dot com 2007-03-13 23:55 ---
I have a patch for this that I'm testing right now.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30196
--- Comment #3 from danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-14 00:06 ---
Subject: Bug 31123
Author: danglin
Date: Wed Mar 14 00:06:26 2007
New Revision: 122891
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=122891
Log:
PR target/31123
* pa.md (vdepi_ior): Don't
--- Comment #4 from danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-14 00:17 ---
Fixed by change on 4.1, 4.2 and trunk.
--
danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from rakdver at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-14 00:39 ---
Subject: Bug 30730
Author: rakdver
Date: Wed Mar 14 00:38:34 2007
New Revision: 122896
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=122896
Log:
PR tree-optimization/30730
PR
--- Comment #16 from rakdver at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-14 00:39
---
Subject: Bug 26900
Author: rakdver
Date: Wed Mar 14 00:38:34 2007
New Revision: 122896
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=122896
Log:
PR tree-optimization/30730
PR
--- Comment #19 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-14 00:42
---
I have a patch which fixes after my patch for PR 30132. The way I fixed it is
an all front-end fix:
Index: typeck.c
===
--- typeck.c(revision
Executing on host: /xxx/gnu/gcc/objdir/gcc/testsuite/g++/../../g++
-B/xxx/gnu/gc
c/objdir/gcc/testsuite/g++/../../
/xxx/gnu/gcc/gcc/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/eh/ia64-
2.C -nostdinc++
-I/xxx/gnu/gcc/objdir/hppa1.1-hp-hpux10.20/libstdc++-v3/include
/hppa1.1-hp-hpux10.20
--- Comment #9 from aoliva at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-14 01:45 ---
Subject: Bug 31127
Author: aoliva
Date: Wed Mar 14 01:45:39 2007
New Revision: 122900
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=122900
Log:
gcc/ChangeLog:
PR middle-end/31127
* cse.c (cse_find_path): Do
--- Comment #2 from ted dot keller at goodrich dot com 2007-03-14 02:37
---
Check out
http://forum.java.sun.com/thread.jspa?threadID=5077618
Describes problem and resolution. You need to install the gcc and gas from the
solaris 10 distribution prior to building a new gcc compiler
--- Comment #9 from brooks at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-14 02:43 ---
Subject: Bug 28068
Author: brooks
Date: Wed Mar 14 02:43:27 2007
New Revision: 122902
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=122902
Log:
PR fortran/28068
* intrinsic.texi: General whitespace cleanup,
--- Comment #10 from brooks at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-14 02:45 ---
Subject: Bug 28068
Author: brooks
Date: Wed Mar 14 02:45:14 2007
New Revision: 122903
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=122903
Log:
PR fortran/28068
* intrinsic.texi: General whitespace cleanup,
--- Comment #11 from brooks at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-14 02:46 ---
_Now_ this is fixed on 4.2 and trunk. :)
--
brooks at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
make[3]: Leaving directory `/test/gnu/gcc/objdir'
Comparing stages 2 and 3
warning: ./cc1-checksum.o differs
Bootstrap comparison failure!
./build/genautomata.o differs
./pointer-set.o differs
./cfgexpand.o differs
./cfglayout.o differs
./builtins.o differs
./cfgloopanal.o differs
./cfgloopmanip.o
--- Comment #17 from patchapp at dberlin dot org 2007-03-14 03:45 ---
Subject: Bug number PR31052
A patch for this bug has been added to the patch tracker.
The mailing list url for the patch is
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-03/msg00892.html
--
--- Comment #10 from aoliva at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-14 04:09 ---
Fixed.
--
aoliva at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
--- Comment #2 from brooks at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-14 04:19 ---
Furthermore, the function form of CHDIR erroneously has A as the argument
name.
(Actually, all three of the names involved for this artgument are erroneous
compared to the G77 documentation, which gives the variable
--- Comment #3 from brooks at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-14 04:37 ---
Subject: Bug 30948
Author: brooks
Date: Wed Mar 14 04:37:15 2007
New Revision: 122904
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=122904
Log:
PR fortran/30922
PR fortran/30948
PR fortran/30953
*
--- Comment #6 from brooks at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-14 04:37 ---
Subject: Bug 30922
Author: brooks
Date: Wed Mar 14 04:37:15 2007
New Revision: 122904
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=122904
Log:
PR fortran/30922
PR fortran/30948
PR fortran/30953
*
--- Comment #1 from brooks at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-14 04:37 ---
Subject: Bug 30953
Author: brooks
Date: Wed Mar 14 04:37:15 2007
New Revision: 122904
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=122904
Log:
PR fortran/30922
PR fortran/30948
PR fortran/30953
*
--- Comment #7 from brooks at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-14 04:39 ---
Subject: Bug 30922
Author: brooks
Date: Wed Mar 14 04:38:47 2007
New Revision: 122905
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=122905
Log:
PR fortran/30922
PR fortran/30948
PR fortran/30953
*
--- Comment #4 from brooks at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-14 04:39 ---
Subject: Bug 30948
Author: brooks
Date: Wed Mar 14 04:38:47 2007
New Revision: 122905
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=122905
Log:
PR fortran/30922
PR fortran/30948
PR fortran/30953
*
1 - 100 of 112 matches
Mail list logo
