https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104423
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80528
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34422
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||aoliva at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78251
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bruno at clisp dot org
--- Comment #14
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45358
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106148
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105887
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105889
--- Comment #2 from Eric Gallager ---
Alternate idea: have fixincludes modify headers that still declare gets() and
mktemp() to annotate them with __attribute__((error)) or
__attribute__((warning)), if they don't already have at least one of
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105895
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78155
--- Comment #8 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to Martin Sebor from comment #4)
> I don't really see what existing warning this might fall under, except
> perhaps -Wchar-subscripts because isalpha and friend use the argument as an
> index into
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105889
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105890
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
Last
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105898
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105828
Bug ID: 105828
Summary: [meta-bug] bogus/missing -Wshadow
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: diagnostic, meta-bug
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105963
Bug ID: 105963
Summary: -Woverlength-strings: don't underline the entire
offending string
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: diagnostic
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44425
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105939
Bug ID: 105939
Summary: "warning: anonymous struct declared inside parameter
list will not be visible outside of this definition or
declaration" should have a warning flag attached
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105939
--- Comment #1 from Eric Gallager ---
Oh, one more; I updated the testcase so it's now:
$ cat icculus_twitter_thread.c
#include
int main(void) {
int x = 0;
do printf("%d\n", x++); while (x < 10);
return 0;
}
const const const
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34422
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
URL|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87656
--- Comment #18 from Eric Gallager ---
-Wmissing-declarations came up as a possibility for this in IRC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105831
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34422
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|Bootstrap error with|Bootstrap error with
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48626
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||iains at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90835
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93082
--- Comment #13 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to Eric Gallager from comment #12)
> OK I'll open a separate bug for that and self-assign
(that's bug 105719 now, for reference)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34422
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93082
--- Comment #12 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to Iain Sandoe from comment #10)
> I do not currently have a plan to try and build a second fix includes tree
> for Frameworks, but happy to review patches if someone else does :)
OK I'll open a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12300
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90835
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
--- Comment #29 from Eric Gallager
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105719
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2022-05-24
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105719
Bug ID: 105719
Summary: RFE: fixincludes should handle Frameworks
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102665
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2022-05-24
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105719
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18469
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|WAITING
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44425
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58312
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |egallager at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82383
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43301
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105710
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44252
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51776
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21549
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|Configure options hard to |Configure options are
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80782
--- Comment #15 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to Iain Sandoe from comment #12)
> please could you be more specific about exactly what's not working?
> - i.e if you're on an older version of the OS.
> - version of Xcode.
So I'm assuming
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102665
--- Comment #4 from Eric Gallager ---
Hm, looking in gcc/configure.ac (where these are defined), it looks like
there's a bunch of other flags that this bug could apply to, too...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44425
--- Comment #3 from Eric Gallager ---
This would be done in the top-level configure script... where it looks like it
already does this for FreeBSD targets?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105721
Bug ID: 105721
Summary: libbacktrace: update README
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: documentation, easyhack
Severity: trivial
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106272
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||build, diagnostic
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106301
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106299
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106298
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106371
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105370
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks|776 |772
--- Comment #1 from Eric Gallager
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106332
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106362
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=772
--- Comment #22 from Eric Gallager ---
oops wait I thought this was a meta-bug for a moment... although, maybe it's
time to start using it as one?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100340
--- Comment #36 from Eric Gallager ---
Note that the solution to this has caused downstream MacPorts bug 65236:
https://trac.macports.org/ticket/65236
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106140
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also|https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill |
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71176
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||xerofoify at gmail dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102537
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99950
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|Option -Wchar-subscripts|Option -Wchar-subscripts
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78155
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|missing warning on invalid |missing warning on invalid
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95381
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[11/12/13 Regression]: |[11 Regression]: Build
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88200
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||build
Summary|[9/10/11/12/13
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98341
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105401
--- Comment #1 from Eric Gallager ---
Actually never mind about point 3: I do actually get warnings from -Winline
when I turn on optimizations:
$ /usr/local/bin/gcc -c -Wall -Wextra -Wc++-compat -Winline -O2
labels_as_values.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86647
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bernd.edlinger at hotmail dot
de,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87656
--- Comment #14 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to David Binderman from comment #11)
> -Wold-style-definition
>
> KnR style function definitions have been deprecated for about 35 years.
>
> Yes, there is a warning for it in gcc, but that
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105499
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
See Also|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49566
--- Comment #4 from Eric Gallager ---
Does this still need to be in WAITING?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106779
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106672
--- Comment #2 from Eric Gallager ---
Well, at the very least GCC could print a nicer error message (and possibly
suggest a fix-it hint for it, too)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106774
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55522
--- Comment #15 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #13)
> Patient: Doctor it hurts when I do this.
> Doctor: then don't do that and if you read the instructions I gave you I
> told you I would hurt this way.
>
The
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107297
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95148
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85043
--- Comment #17 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to Marek Polacek from comment #16)
> Should be fixed now.
It seems the fix just silenced the -Wuseless-cast false positive without also
adding the separate -Wcast-to-the-same-type flag to cover
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89549
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||lhyatt at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105764
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106502
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43301
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||aoliva at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106537
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106486
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98790
--- Comment #12 from Eric Gallager ---
Hearing that this may still happen:
https://forums.wesnoth.org/viewtopic.php?p=675418#p675418
(haven't tested myself)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106429
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106487
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43301
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
URL||https://gcc.gnu.org/piperma
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106672
Bug ID: 106672
Summary: support Apple's old __private_extern__ keyword
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106672
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103210
--- Comment #5 from Eric Gallager ---
Downstream version of this issue:
https://github.com/cooljeanius/apple-gdb-1824/issues/9
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108310
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108310
Bug ID: 108310
Summary: Some warnings that -Wtraditional-conversion causes to
be emitted aren't actually controlled by it
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102824
--- Comment #6 from Eric Gallager ---
@marxin is this something you checked during the sphinx conversion and
reversion at all?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108310
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88345
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108310
--- Comment #3 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to Eric Gallager from comment #0)
> So, I'm having trouble crafting a testcase that properly reproduces this
> issue, but...
...for reference, this is what I've got so far:
$ cat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97398
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||89180, 87403
--- Comment #4 from Eric
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93644
--- Comment #22 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to George R. Goffe from comment #20)
> Hi,
>
> I'm seeing this message from the "current" findutils.
>
Likewise with libiconv.
> What is the solution?
One hasn't been figured out yet; just use
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107764
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2022-11-21
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105278
--- Comment #7 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #6)
> I don't think clang implements -Wfloat-equal at all, at least they didn't at
> the last time I looked a few years back.
I just checked their diagnostics
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=772
--- Comment #24 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to Eric Gallager from comment #22)
> oops wait I thought this was a meta-bug for a moment... although, maybe it's
> time to start using it as one?
Never mind about this; looks like there's a
501 - 600 of 729 matches
Mail list logo