https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95599
--- Comment #1 from Lewis Baker ---
Note there is also some different behaviour if we change the example slightly
by removing awaitable::~awaitable() and leaving the awaitable type with a
trivial destructor.
See https://godbolt.org/z/ff5Uvy
In
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95599
Bug ID: 95599
Summary: [coroutines] destructor for temporary operand to
co_yield expression called before end of
full-expression
Product: gcc
Version: 10.1.1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95598
Bug ID: 95598
Summary: [coroutines] Destructor for object returned from
get_return_object() never called
Product: gcc
Version: 10.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95597
Bug ID: 95597
Summary: Rejects using-declaration with "typename" in global
area
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88398
--- Comment #42 from Jiu Fu Guo ---
(In reply to Jiu Fu Guo from comment #41)
> (In reply to Wilco from comment #40)
> > (In reply to Jiu Fu Guo from comment #39)
> > > I’m thinking to draft a patch for this optimization. If any suggestions,
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88398
--- Comment #41 from Jiu Fu Guo ---
(In reply to Wilco from comment #40)
> (In reply to Jiu Fu Guo from comment #39)
> > I’m thinking to draft a patch for this optimization. If any suggestions,
> > please point out, thanks.
>
> Which
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95578
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2020-06-09
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95595
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95581
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||seurer at linux dot
vnet.ibm.com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95596
Bug ID: 95596
Summary: string literal wrong overload resolution (char* vs
std::string)
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95018
--- Comment #38 from Jiu Fu Guo ---
(In reply to Thomas Koenig from comment #37)
> (In reply to Jiu Fu Guo from comment #36)
>
> Will you also backport to gcc 10, the other affected branch?
Yes, after it is stable on trunk, then backport to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95571
jcmvbkbc at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95571
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Max Filippov :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:1d9921cbdc732e1a7fc66b9c24a6dfa9625bd4c0
commit r11-1078-g1d9921cbdc732e1a7fc66b9c24a6dfa9625bd4c0
Author: Max Filippov
Date: Sat
Hello!
I am writing to report a potential bug I encountered when playing with the
GIMPLE IR. I enabled the ASan and would like to print out all ASAN_MARK
statements for the following simple code:
int main(int argc ,char **argv)
{
int stack_array[100];
stack_array[1] = 100;
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95586
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95572
--- Comment #2 from sujian.liu at huawei dot com ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #1)
> Hello.
> GCC 7.x is out of support, can you please test a newer release, ideally GCC
> 10.1 release?
I tried to compile with GCC 8.2.0, but no
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95595
--- Comment #1 from Bill Seurer ---
OK, this will also fails on an LE system if I use --with-cpu=power7
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95581
Segher Boessenkool changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||segher at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95595
Bug ID: 95595
Summary: [11 regression] ICE in building gcc after r11-959
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95594
Bug ID: 95594
Summary: overzealous -Wmaybe-uninitialized calling a function
with an empty range of const pointers
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95593
Bug ID: 95593
Summary: [c++20] decltype() on consteval compiles invalid code
Product: gcc
Version: 10.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95592
--- Comment #2 from Kevin Stallard ---
Please forgive the fat fingers.
gcc 7.5.0 on Ubuntu 18.04.4 is the host used to build the cross compiler.
(In reply to Kevin Stallard from comment #1)
> I should also add that this was build with gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95592
Kevin Stallard changed:
What|Removed |Added
Host|Ubuntu 20.04|Ubuntu 18.04.4
--- Comment #1 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95592
Bug ID: 95592
Summary: Collision with struct _Cosh when Cross compiling
libstdc++
Product: gcc
Version: 8.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95591
Bug ID: 95591
Summary: [coroutines] ICE when co_yielding string literal from
generator coroutine
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95590
Bug ID: 95590
Summary: OpenACC 'attach' behavior if already attached to
different data
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: openacc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95542
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2020-06-08
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95538
--- Comment #2 from Alexandre Oliva ---
More likely we've just always missed these lto dump files: IIRC they used to be
created in tmpdir, even during -save-temps builds.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95541
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|ICE in |[PDT] ICE in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95365
Alexandre Oliva changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |WONTFIX
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95587
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95586
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2020-06-08
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95581
--- Comment #3 from Martin Sebor ---
I posted a patch to avoid the ICE but it's not clear to me that it's the right
fix: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2020-June/547548.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95584
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95224
Alexandre Oliva changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94848
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Tobias Burnus :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:1c0fdaf79e3618fd7512608a2e5c62b6b306e9e8
commit r11-1075-g1c0fdaf79e3618fd7512608a2e5c62b6b306e9e8
Author: Tobias Burnus
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95551
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Tobias Burnus :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:1c0fdaf79e3618fd7512608a2e5c62b6b306e9e8
commit r11-1075-g1c0fdaf79e3618fd7512608a2e5c62b6b306e9e8
Author: Tobias Burnus
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95224
--- Comment #2 from Alexandre Oliva ---
That's not expected, but it seems highly suspicious indeed. I'll have a look.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95584
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95585
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95575
--- Comment #1 from Iain Buclaw ---
Ah, for some reason I thought that moving the dejagnu .exp scripts from
top-level gdc.test to one per each subdirectory would remove the need for that.
I'll revert that part of the change then.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95544
--- Comment #7 from Steve Kargl ---
On Mon, Jun 08, 2020 at 08:02:48PM +, anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95544
>
> anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
>
>What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95573
Iain Buclaw changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95544
--- Comment #6 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Submitted for review here:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2020-June/054499.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95573
--- Comment #1 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Iain Buclaw :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:5fceefeee9a10cfba621d215f011a58badc246ad
commit r11-1070-g5fceefeee9a10cfba621d215f011a58badc246ad
Author: Iain Buclaw
Date: Mon
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95544
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89788
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77432
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
Last
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95581
--- Comment #2 from Iain Sandoe ---
BTW, this is a bootstrap break for powerpc-darwin9, it fires when building
libgfortran (OK it's an 'all languages' bootstrap break).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86577
--- Comment #3 from Lénárd Szolnoki ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #2)
> Is this a dup of PR 51577 ?
Yes, seems like it is.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95589
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95589
Bug ID: 95589
Summary: missing warning initializing a reference with a
dereferenced null
Product: gcc
Version: 10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95270
--- Comment #2 from jules at gcc dot gnu.org ---
TBH I've suspected problems with misuse of the bias for attach/detach before,
but I've not come up with a test case. I'll have a look.
Thanks!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86577
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Is this a dup of PR 51577 ?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95588
Bug ID: 95588
Summary: No warning in -Wformat for narrowing formats
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95581
--- Comment #1 from Martin Sebor ---
gimple_call_arg(stmt, 2) asserts for this GIMPLE_CALL statement:
vect__5.6_24 = __builtin_altivec_mask_for_load (vectp_a.5_8);
The call is made with just one argument but the type of the function is
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95195
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:8cd239614e43c9dcc0838845aec504e5eb938dbd
commit r11-1068-g8cd239614e43c9dcc0838845aec504e5eb938dbd
Author: Harald Anlauf
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95091
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:8cd239614e43c9dcc0838845aec504e5eb938dbd
commit r11-1068-g8cd239614e43c9dcc0838845aec504e5eb938dbd
Author: Harald Anlauf
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95587
Bug ID: 95587
Summary: ICE in gfc_target_encode_expr, at
fortran/target-memory.c:362
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95270
Thomas Schwinge changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jules at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95586
Bug ID: 95586
Summary: ICE in gfc_validate_kind, at fortran/trans-types.c:773
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95585
Bug ID: 95585
Summary: ICE in gfc_check_reshape, at fortran/check.c:4751
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95584
Bug ID: 95584
Summary: ICE in generic_correspondence, at
fortran/interface.c:1260
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95113
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95113
--- Comment #7 from Martin Jambor ---
Fixed. Thanks for reporting.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93385
Bug 93385 depends on bug 95113, which changed state.
Bug 95113 Summary: [10/11 Regression] Wrong code w/ -O2 -fexceptions
-fnon-call-exceptions
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95113
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95113
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Martin Jambor
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:127bf4228d0cb21f28fd5ed4dd820fa4760fc771
commit r10-8264-g127bf4228d0cb21f28fd5ed4dd820fa4760fc771
Author: Martin Jambor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95583
Bug ID: 95583
Summary: [OpenMP] Offloading – Missed optimization / before LTO
stream out, do more IPA optimizations affecting
host←→target ABI
Product: gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95494
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |ASSIGNED
--- Comment #7 from Martin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95580
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86577
Lénárd Szolnoki changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||leni536 at gmail dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95580
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95579
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Summary|[10/11
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94955
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nmmm at nmmm dot nu
--- Comment #9 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95416
Alexandre Oliva changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95579
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95527
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 48705
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=48705=edit
gcc11-pr95527.patch
Untested fix for ffs. Haven't touched others. I think parity can't be
optimized that way, for
CC) version 11.0.0 20200608 (experimental) (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)
compiled by GNU C version 11.0.0 20200608 (experimental), GMP version
6.1.2, MPFR version 4.0.1, MPC version 1.1.0, isl version none
GGC heuristics: --param ggc-min-expand=30 --param ggc-min-heapsize=4096
GNU GIMPLE (GCC) versi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93467
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95581
Bug ID: 95581
Summary: [11 Regression] ICE in gimple_call_arg, at
gimple.h:3260 since
r11-959-gb825a22890740f341eae566af27e18e528cd29a7
Product: gcc
Version:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95581
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95580
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||11.0
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95580
Bug ID: 95580
Summary: [11 Regression] ICE in tree_strip_any_location_wrapper
at gcc/tree.h:4011 since r11-959-gb825a22890740f34
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95579
--- Comment #1 from Nikolay Mihaylov ---
Code compiles on 9.x
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95578
Bug ID: 95578
Summary: std::ranges::copy and std::views::take_while don't
want to play together
Product: gcc
Version: 10.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95579
Bug ID: 95579
Summary: internal compiler error: in sign_mask, at
wide-int.h:855
Product: gcc
Version: 10.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Martin Sebor :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c1057cc0a8ad972e0a2218ab74038a56e5514c39
commit r11-1067-gc1057cc0a8ad972e0a2218ab74038a56e5514c39
Author: Martin Sebor
Date: Mon
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95577
Iain Sandoe changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2020-06-08
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95494
--- Comment #6 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #5 from Martin Liška ---
> (In reply to r...@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de from comment #4)
>> > --- Comment #3 from Martin Liška ---
>> > Is there a compile farm machine I
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87291
--- Comment #32 from Antoni ---
Thanks; that looks really nice.
The function gcc_jit_context_add_top_level_asm might be missing a location
parameter.
(In reply to David Malcolm from comment #31)
> Created attachment 48704 [details]
> v4 of
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93623
--- Comment #12 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to calixte from comment #11)
> Why did you remove __gcov_flush ?
It is not a supported __gcov_* library call:
https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Gcov-and-Optimization.html
You should rather call
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95494
--- Comment #5 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to r...@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de from comment #4)
> > --- Comment #3 from Martin Liška ---
> > Is there a compile farm machine I can test it on?
>
> Sure: gcc211 should do the trick.
Thanks.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95572
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95577
Bug ID: 95577
Summary: Tcl error with testsuite/gcc.misc-tests/outputs.exp on
darwin
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87291
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #48694|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87291
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2020-06-08
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92929
--- Comment #7 from jules at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Test case & further discussion in:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2020-June/547424.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67901
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
Known to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93026
markeggleston at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
1 - 100 of 131 matches
Mail list logo
