http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54572
--- Comment #8 from Ian Lance Taylor 2012-11-26 23:08:45
UTC ---
The crash within libbacktrace is occurring as it tries to read the debug info.
This is presumably a bug in libbacktrace, but I don't know what the problem is
without more in
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54572
--- Comment #7 from Ian Lance Taylor 2012-11-26 23:02:46
UTC ---
Why are there no line numbers in the backtrace from gdb? You said you compiled
with -g. Are you sure that libbacktrace itself was compiled with -g?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54630
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ian at airs dot com
||ian at airs dot com
Version|4.7.1 |4.8.0
Resolution||FIXED
--- Comment #2 from Ian Lance Taylor 2012-11-19 16:29:28
UTC ---
Fixed in mainline. Thanks.
||ian at airs dot com
Resolution||FIXED
--- Comment #3 from Ian Lance Taylor 2012-11-13 21:28:29
UTC ---
Fixed.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55305
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55305
Bug #: 55305
Summary: invalid aggregate constprop
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: wrong-code
Severit
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55228
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54973
--- Comment #16 from Ian Lance Taylor 2012-10-27 00:55:14
UTC ---
Thanks!
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55087
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55087
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55087
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ian at airs dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55061
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54973
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ian at airs dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55061
--- Comment #24 from Ian Lance Taylor 2012-10-25 23:51:00
UTC ---
The patch in comment #22 is OK with a ChangeLog entry.
Thanks.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55061
--- Comment #19 from Ian Lance Taylor 2012-10-25 18:55:25
UTC ---
Yes, I'm sure, because
test -n "${with_target_subdir}"
is true exactly when libbacktrace is being built as a target library. That
test will not be true when libbacktra
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55061
--- Comment #17 from Ian Lance Taylor 2012-10-25 17:41:26
UTC ---
Thanks for attaching the config.log. The config.log suggests that this
program:
int
main ()
{
return _Unwind_GetIPInfo ();
}
both compiles and links when using G
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55061
--- Comment #16 from Ian Lance Taylor 2012-10-25 17:37:10
UTC ---
I think you may be looking at the wrong thing. The libbacktrace configure.ac
only uses GCC_CHECK_UNWIND_GETIPINFO when it is built as a target library. You
are seeing a fa
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55061
--- Comment #9 from Ian Lance Taylor 2012-10-25 03:34:22
UTC ---
That's strange, because GCC 4.0 doesn't have _Unwind_GetIPInfo, so the
configure test that checks for it should have failed, and it should not have
been called. Does the Xco
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55061
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55061
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ian at airs dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54820
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ian at airs dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54918
--- Comment #6 from Ian Lance Taylor 2012-10-23 18:14:04
UTC ---
Jakub Jelinek asked that I not change the libgo SONAME now that GCC 4.7 has
been released. So libgo in GCC 4.6 and 4.7 use the same SONAME but are
incompatible, and that is
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54918
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54834
--- Comment #2 from Ian Lance Taylor 2012-10-08 16:19:25
UTC ---
The error shows that libbacktrace is including ../gcc/include/unwind.h, but
that file should not exist at the time that libbacktrace is built. I assume
that it does exist, b
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54834
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ian at airs dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54749
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54749
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|middle-end |other
--- Comment #3 from Ia
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54749
--- Comment #1 from Ian Lance Taylor 2012-09-29 16:59:02
UTC ---
You filed this against the "go" component, but it seems that Go is not
involved. Is that right? This is just about a backtrace printed after a run
of the Fortran compiler?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54732
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
||2012-09-28
CC||ian at airs dot com
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #1 from Ian Lance Taylor 2012-09-28 04:30:19
UTC ---
The problem seems to be the use of automake automatic dependencies
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54726
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54726
--- Comment #2 from Ian Lance Taylor 2012-09-27 15:36:30
UTC ---
The segfault is a bug I will fix, but the fact that the backtrace doesn't work
doesn't matter. We didn't have the backtrace information before, and we won't
have it in this
||ian at airs dot com
Resolution||FIXED
--- Comment #2 from Ian Lance Taylor 2012-09-19 04:39:57
UTC ---
I don't understand why "make install" is building anything in libbacktrace at
all. It suggests that the "make"
||ian at airs dot com
Resolution||FIXED
--- Comment #3 from Ian Lance Taylor 2012-09-17 21:16:47
UTC ---
Fixed.
||ian at airs dot com
Resolution||FIXED
--- Comment #5 from Ian Lance Taylor 2012-09-17 17:45:24
UTC ---
Should be fixed now. Sorry about that.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24724
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ian at airs dot com
--- Comment #15
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52583
--- Comment #28 from Ian Lance Taylor 2012-09-06 05:30:05
UTC ---
The log test problems should be fixed again.
If it reappears, please don't add to this PR. This PR is about Solaris
problems. Open a new PR instead. Thanks.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53879
--- Comment #3 from Ian Lance Taylor 2012-07-13 17:47:18
UTC ---
The version of Go on the 4.6 branch is quite out-dated. I don't mind if
somebody tries to fix it up, but I don't plan to do so myself. I strongly
recommend that anybody using gccg
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53879
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53299
--- Comment #4 from Ian Lance Taylor 2012-05-11 00:17:49
UTC ---
Sure, one way to solve this problem would be to change libiberty to use
automake and libtool.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53299
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ian at airs dot com
--- Comment #2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52586
--- Comment #10 from Ian Lance Taylor 2012-05-02 04:33:56
UTC ---
I don't understand the archive/zip test failure. The files in question are
libgo/go/archive/zip/testdata/go-with-datadesc-sig.zip and
go-no-datadesc-sig.zip. They exist in the re
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37303
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||4.8.0
--- Comment #6 from Ian Lance Ta
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37303
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ian at airs dot com
Known to
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52586
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52586
--- Comment #4 from Ian Lance Taylor 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 2.7, which does not h
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52358
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52583
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |SUSPENDED
--- Comment #22 from Ian Lan
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52360
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52357
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
--- Comment #3 from Ian Lance
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53125
--- Comment #1 from Ian Lance Taylor 2012-04-25 22:34:17
UTC ---
Out of curiousity I tried compiling the test case with -O2. On x86_64 it took
57.4 seconds, on SPARC it took 20 minutes 33 seconds.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52357
--- Comment #2 from Ian Lance Taylor 2012-04-25 22:15:19
UTC ---
SPARC register allocator slowness filed as PR 53125.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53125
Bug #: 53125
Summary: Very slow register allocation on SPARC
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52357
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52583
--- Comment #21 from Ian Lance Taylor 2012-04-25 14:56:56
UTC ---
I no longer see any failures on i386 Solaris. I see a few failures on x86_64
Solaris. They are all crashing in x86_64_fallback_frame_state when trying to
unwind through a signal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52341
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Version|4.7.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52583
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Version|4.7.0 |4.7.1
--- Comment #19 from Ian Lance T
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52583
--- Comment #16 from Ian Lance Taylor 2012-04-24 20:43:33
UTC ---
I think that the problems with the log test should be fixed now.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52462
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52359
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51874
--- Comment #16 from Ian Lance Taylor 2012-04-24 16:33:13
UTC ---
At some point, can you update this bug with the current set of test failures
using Go on Irix? No rush.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46770
--- Comment #104 from Ian Lance Taylor 2012-04-22
22:26:50 UTC ---
I'm not sure what you mean. Each object file will have a .init_array section.
The linker will assemble those sections in the usual manner.
The order of global constructors in a
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46770
--- Comment #102 from Ian Lance Taylor 2012-04-22
21:16:14 UTC ---
To be clear, nothing has changed in collect2. The only thing that has changed
is that data that was being emitted in the .ctors section is now being emitted
in the .init_array se
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46770
--- Comment #97 from Ian Lance Taylor 2012-04-22 17:03:24
UTC ---
One option you have is to configure gcc with --disable-initfini-array.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46770
--- Comment #94 from Ian Lance Taylor 2012-04-19 00:14:01
UTC ---
It is misleading to think that the linker accumulates code in translation unit
order for a C++ program. E.g., that is not what happens for template code or
string constants. And
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46770
--- Comment #92 from Ian Lance Taylor 2012-04-18 03:50:51
UTC ---
As I said in comment #47 and elsewhere, you should not confuse the order in
which entries appear in .ctors or .init_array sections with the order in which
they appear in the binary
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52787
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ian at airs dot com
--- Comment #1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51206
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ian at airs dot com, ktietz
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52583
--- Comment #12 from Ian Lance Taylor 2012-03-17 16:41:21
UTC ---
Can you attach the output of readelf --debug (not just --debug=line) for the
program that fails?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52583
--- Comment #6 from Ian Lance Taylor 2012-03-16 03:18:46
UTC ---
Thanks for looking at this.
The first step is to run readelf --debug=line FILE to make sure that the line
number information is recorded correctly. Which of course it probably is.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52583
--- Comment #4 from Ian Lance Taylor 2012-03-15 16:23:33
UTC ---
If you look at the test (libgo/go/log/log_test.go), you'll see that it simply
does
if useFormat {
Printf("hello %d world", 23)
} else {
Println("hello", 23,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52583
--- Comment #2 from Ian Lance Taylor 2012-03-15 05:27:03
UTC ---
What's failing is not Printf or Println, but the filename and line number.
Those are retrieved using DWARF lookup on the PC, and evidently something is
going wrong in that area. I
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52557
--- Comment #8 from Ian Lance Taylor 2012-03-13 22:13:24
UTC ---
>From the log files, looks like there is some problem with unwinding the stack.
My first guess would be that there is something wrong with the ARM-specific
code in libgo/runtime/go
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52557
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52557
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52571
--- Comment #3 from Ian Lance Taylor 2012-03-13 15:48:36
UTC ---
I agree: if the symbol is always common, the linker should use the largest
alignment. But the symbol need not always be common. Consider one file with
"unsigned long int *p;" and
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52571
Bug #: 52571
Summary: vectorizer changes alignment of common symbols
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pri
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52532
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52342
--- Comment #4 from Ian Lance Taylor 2012-03-05 15:38:36
UTC ---
Don't worry, I will fix that one too, although it's odd that I don't see it
myself.
It's fairly important that gcc 4.7 support the Go 1 release, and that is going
to require a few
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52342
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
||ian at airs dot com
Known to work||4.7.0
Resolution||FIXED
--- Comment #2 from Ian Lance Taylor 2012-02-27 18:52:04
UTC ---
Fixed on mainline. A patch for the 4.6 branch is fine with me but I don't pl
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52349
--- Comment #5 from Ian Lance Taylor 2012-02-23 14:16:41
UTC ---
Richi's patch is approved (I'm testing it myself, but go ahead and commit if it
looks fine to you).
Thanks.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52218
--- Comment #5 from Ian Lance Taylor 2012-02-21 18:33:14
UTC ---
If ARM GNU/Linux does not support getcontext/setcontext, then this particular
configure test is not particularly relevant, since the library isn't going to
work anyhow. I suppose t
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50166
--- Comment #5 from Ian Lance Taylor 2012-02-17 15:59:42
UTC ---
Can this PR be closed? It seems to have been fixed.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52266
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46986
--- Comment #28 from Ian Lance Taylor 2012-02-16 16:50:13
UTC ---
Using pthreads will be much less efficient than the current code using
getcontext/setcontext. Writing machine-specific replacement code would be a
much better idea than that.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46986
--- Comment #26 from Ian Lance Taylor 2012-02-16 15:48:18
UTC ---
I think it would be great if somebody would tell me something I can used
instead of makecontext/getcontext/setcontext. Unless somebody can come up with
one, then I think the only
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48407
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
||ian at airs dot com
Resolution||FIXED
--- Comment #2 from Ian Lance Taylor 2012-02-14 20:01:35
UTC ---
This particular problem has been fixed, so closing this bug report. I don't
know what the current status is on FreeBSD. gcc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46986
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |SUSPENDED
--- Comment #18 from Ian Lan
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47524
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47726
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |SUSPENDED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48122
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48243
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48410
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48411
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48411
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |ASSIGNED
--- Comment #2 from Ian Lance
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52218
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51874
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
--- Comment #10 from Ian Lance
901 - 1000 of 1616 matches
Mail list logo
