http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53163
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53160
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53163
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-04-30
07:24:44 UTC ---
Created attachment 27264
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=27264
gcc48-pr53163.patch
Untested fix.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53162
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-04-30
08:12:44 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #0)
The declaration of f1 is rejected but with an unhelpful diagnostic, if the
^^
That should say: f2
I
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53141
Uros Bizjak ubizjak at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||x86
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53138
--- Comment #2 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-04-30 08:57:45 UTC ---
Author: uros
Date: Mon Apr 30 08:57:41 2012
New Revision: 186962
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=186962
Log:
Backport from mainline
2012-04-27
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51625
Peter Fraenkel pnf at podsnap dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|CLOSED
---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53164
Bug #: 53164
Summary: Undefined reference to template function instantiation
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: major
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53160
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-04-30
09:45:34 UTC ---
Created attachment 27265
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=27265
gcc48-pr53160.patch
Untested fix.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53138
--- Comment #3 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-04-30 09:56:31 UTC ---
Author: uros
Date: Mon Apr 30 09:56:27 2012
New Revision: 186963
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=186963
Log:
Backport from mainline
2012-04-27
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53165
Bug #: 53165
Summary: multiline raw strings as macro arguments
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53153
Steven Bosscher steven at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51625
--- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-04-30
10:02:24 UTC ---
FWIW int{1.0} is an invalid narrowing conversion in C++11, even when the double
value is known to be exactly representable as int. Without -pedantic-errors or
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52852
Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53165
Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53166
Bug #: 53166
Summary: static_assert produces bogus warning
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: major
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53138
--- Comment #4 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-04-30 10:22:44 UTC ---
Author: uros
Date: Mon Apr 30 10:22:39 2012
New Revision: 186964
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=186964
Log:
Backport from mainline
2012-04-27
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53138
Uros Bizjak ubizjak at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53164
Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53166
Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53112
--- Comment #2 from birender.singh at hotmail dot com 2012-04-30 11:06:51 UTC
---
Building 64bit gcc-4.4.4 and received below error:
1.
Edit the configure file from gcc-4.4.4 directory at line number 4607:
Line 4607:
if test -d
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53112
--- Comment #3 from Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-04-30
11:14:07 UTC ---
../gcc-4.4.4/configure --with-gmp=/usr/local --with-mpfr=/usr/local
sparcv9-sun-solaris2.9
Why did you change that? Retry with the first setup and look
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53112
--- Comment #4 from birender.singh at hotmail dot com 2012-04-30 11:48:46 UTC
---
Sorry buddy, I have removed past code and setup the fresh code.
This time have build 64 bit gmp and mpfr with ABI=64 @ --prefix path
/usr/local/ and tried to build
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53112
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-04-30
11:49:23 UTC ---
No need to re-run the original setup, the problem is obviously that
/els/install/biru/local/gmp_64 and /els/install/biru/local/mpfr_64 are not in
the runtime
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53112
--- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-04-30
11:51:06 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #4)
Sorry buddy, I have removed past code and setup the fresh code.
This time have build 64 bit gmp and mpfr with ABI=64 @ --prefix
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53112
Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|major |normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53112
--- Comment #7 from Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-04-30
11:53:14 UTC ---
You cannot build GCC 4.4 as a 64-bit binary, that is not possible. But by
default on GCC on Solaris is able to generate both 32-bit and 64-bit output
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53112
--- Comment #8 from Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-04-30
11:55:06 UTC ---
This time have build 64 bit gmp and mpfr with ABI=64 @ --prefix path
/usr/local/ and tried to build gcc in 64 bit. but it gave this error
ELFCLASS64
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53112
--- Comment #9 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-04-30
12:09:13 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #7)
You cannot build GCC 4.4 as a 64-bit binary, that is not possible. But by
default on GCC on Solaris is able to generate both
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52983
Alexandre Oliva aoliva at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52983
--- Comment #4 from Alexandre Oliva aoliva at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-04-30
12:15:44 UTC ---
Created attachment 27267
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=27267
Proposed patch to fix the problem (testing)
Here's the patch. It's much
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53167
Bug #: 53167
Summary: [4.8 regression] bootstrap failure: no previous
prototype for 'preserve_function_body_p'
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53015
--- Comment #7 from brainschrat at gmx dot de 2012-04-30 13:01:21 UTC ---
I fixed up my delta script as I now finaly understood what it did:
#! /bin/sh
cp input.f90 /home/staff/paul/noo/src
make -C /home/staff/paul/noo DEBUG=1 lib
cp
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53133
--- Comment #2 from Uros Bizjak ubizjak at gmail dot com 2012-04-30 13:19:56
UTC ---
This is due to following splitter in i386.md:
(define_split
[(set (match_operand 0 ext_register_operand)
(and (match_dup 0)
(const_int -256)))
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53133
--- Comment #3 from H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com 2012-04-30 13:26:32
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
H.J., should we consider these processors as affected by partial reg stall?
We will investigate.
--with-libelf=/usr/local --enable-lto
--prefix=/home/regehr/z/compiler-install/gcc-r186954-install
--program-prefix=r186954- --enable-languages=c,c++
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.8.0 20120430 (experimental) (GCC)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53161
H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka at gcc dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53169
Bug #: 53169
Summary: Memory leak in std::vectorstd::vector*
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: critical
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53169
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-04-30
14:28:11 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #0)
The attached source is a minimal test case, implementing a sparse array of
std::vectors in class Collection, and test()
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53112
--- Comment #10 from birender.singh at hotmail dot com 2012-04-30 14:57:03 UTC
---
while building for a few hours the build failed with error as below:
make[8]: *** [libjavamath.la] Error 1
make[8]: Leaving directory
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53169
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-04-30
14:59:05 UTC ---
By changing your main to:
int main() {
test();
sleep(10);
char* p = (char*)malloc(1024 * 127);
for (int i=0; i 100; ++i)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53112
--- Comment #11 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-04-30
15:00:28 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #10)
while building for a few hours the build failed with error as below:
make[8]: *** [libjavamath.la] Error 1
make[8]:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53169
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-04-30
15:13:07 UTC ---
Similarly, calling malloc_trim(0) after test() causes glibc to immediately
return the memory to the system (requiring a sbrk system call next time memory
is
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53169
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-04-30
15:16:14 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #3)
You should probably use sbrk and/or experiment with
Sorry, I meant use strace, *not* sbrk!
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53161
Jan Hubicka hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53168
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53169
--- Comment #5 from Antoine Poliakov antoinep92 at gmail dot com 2012-04-30
15:27:16 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
So it's possible to get the memory libstdc+ allocates to be returned to the
system, but it's under the control of glibc,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53170
Bug #: 53170
Summary: ERROR: g++.dg/cpp0x/variadic-value1.C: syntax error in
target selector target c++11 for dg-do 2 run {
target c++11 }
Classification: Unclassified
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53169
--- Comment #6 from Antoine Poliakov antoinep92 at gmail dot com 2012-04-30
15:31:17 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #4)
(In reply to comment #3)
You should probably use sbrk and/or experiment with
Sorry, I meant use strace, *not* sbrk!
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52586
--- Comment #4 from Ian Lance Taylor ian at airs dot com 2012-04-30 15:45:06
UTC ---
Unfortunately the MIPS64 machine in the GCC compile farm, gcc42.fsffrance.org,
is running a version of glibc that is too old to build libgo. It is using
glibc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53169
Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52586
--- Comment #5 from ian at gcc dot gnu.org ian at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-04-30
16:04:28 UTC ---
Author: ian
Date: Mon Apr 30 16:04:17 2012
New Revision: 186986
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=186986
Log:
PR go/52586
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52586
--- Comment #6 from ian at gcc dot gnu.org ian at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-04-30
16:04:43 UTC ---
Author: ian
Date: Mon Apr 30 16:04:33 2012
New Revision: 186987
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=186987
Log:
PR go/52586
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52586
Ian Lance Taylor ian at airs dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51314
--- Comment #3 from Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-04-30
16:36:51 UTC ---
Author: jason
Date: Mon Apr 30 16:36:37 2012
New Revision: 186988
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=186988
Log:
PR c++/51314
*
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=5297
--- Comment #7 from Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-04-30
16:57:33 UTC ---
Author: manu
Date: Mon Apr 30 16:57:22 2012
New Revision: 186991
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=186991
Log:
2012-04-30 Manuel
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=5297
--- Comment #8 from Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-04-30
17:01:10 UTC ---
Author: manu
Revision: 186991
Modified property: svn:log
Modified: svn:log at Mon Apr 30 17:00:59 2012
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52974
--- Comment #6 from Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-04-30
17:01:11 UTC ---
Author: manu
Revision: 186991
Modified property: svn:log
Modified: svn:log at Mon Apr 30 17:00:59 2012
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51314
Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52974
--- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-04-30
17:03:30 UTC ---
Nice, thanks very much!
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53153
--- Comment #3 from Steven Bosscher steven at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-04-30
17:11:15 UTC ---
This is the early forwprop eliminating the promotion cast from char to int. I
don't think this is a valid transformation.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52974
Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51033
--- Comment #24 from Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-04-30
17:23:34 UTC ---
Author: jason
Date: Mon Apr 30 17:23:28 2012
New Revision: 186994
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=186994
Log:
PR c++/51033
gcc/
*
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52998
Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|caret and |different
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52866
Benjamin Kosnik bkoz at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52586
--- Comment #8 from Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-04-30
18:01:04 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #4)
Unfortunately the MIPS64 machine in the GCC compile farm, gcc42.fsffrance.org,
is running a version of glibc that is too old to
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53136
Uros Bizjak ubizjak at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41743
William J. Schmidt wschmidt at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||wschmidt
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53173
Bug #: 53173
Summary: PROD02
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52941
--- Comment #9 from Oleg Endo olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-04-30 19:16:31
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #8)
(In reply to comment #7)
Created attachment 27173 [details]
Proposed patch
Looks even better.
Only one thing ... is it safe
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52941
Oleg Endo olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #27173|0 |1
is
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53148
--- Comment #4 from Thomas Koenig tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-04-30
19:31:24 UTC ---
Author: tkoenig
Date: Mon Apr 30 19:31:13 2012
New Revision: 186999
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=186999
Log:
2012-04-30 Thomas
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53148
Thomas Koenig tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50751
--- Comment #29 from Oleg Endo olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-04-30
19:37:50 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #28)
I'm now trying to work around this by adding special insn_and_split patterns
for the reload phase and removing the displacement
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53173
--- Comment #1 from Marc Glisse marc.glisse at normalesup dot org 2012-04-30
20:02:59 UTC ---
Uh, where are you reporting a bug in gcc?
(In reply to comment #0)
I am trying to upgrade (GCC) 4.4.0 to (GCC) 4.6.2. I see bunch of
incompatible
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53174
Bug #: 53174
Summary: ICE in expand_debug_expr
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53173
--- Comment #2 from gcc shalja.rudra at gmail dot com 2012-04-30 20:31:49 UTC
---
Thanks Marc !
Sorry on missing most words in few error lines.
2. error: no matching function for call to ‘std::pairconst long unsigned int,
boost::shared_ptrconst
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53141
--- Comment #4 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-04-30 21:30:13 UTC ---
Author: uros
Date: Mon Apr 30 21:30:06 2012
New Revision: 187000
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=187000
Log:
PR target/53141
* config/i386/i386.md
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53141
Uros Bizjak ubizjak at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53136
--- Comment #1 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-04-30 21:34:39 UTC ---
Author: uros
Date: Mon Apr 30 21:34:35 2012
New Revision: 187001
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=187001
Log:
PR middle-end/53136
* ipa-prop.c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53136
Uros Bizjak ubizjak at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53153
--- Comment #4 from Steven Bosscher steven at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-04-30
21:43:33 UTC ---
Created attachment 27272
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=27272
Eliminate unreachable case labels
This is basically what the code in
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53112
--- Comment #12 from Eric Botcazou ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-04-30
22:56:41 UTC ---
Yet 64 bit gcc-4.4.4 not build.:(
If you don't need Java, configure with --disable-libgcj. The error you have is
apparently at installation time,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53148
--- Comment #6 from John Stanley jpsinthemix at verizon dot net 2012-04-30
23:47:03 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #5)
Fixed on trunk and 4.7.
Closing.
Thanks a lot for the bug report!
I rebuilt gcc with cherry-picked patches and all look
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53174
H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53038
--- Comment #3 from Alan Modra amodra at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-05-01 04:03:25
UTC ---
Author: amodra
Date: Tue May 1 04:03:21 2012
New Revision: 187010
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=187010
Log:
PR target/53038
*
86 matches
Mail list logo
