--- Comment #1 from schwab at suse dot de 2007-06-11 20:50 ---
It is not portable to pass a long when an int is expected. But exchanging
unsigned and signed variants of the same type is always possible.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32291
--- Comment #19 from schwab at suse dot de 2007-06-03 15:14 ---
Fixed by http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-01/msg00808.html.
--
schwab at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from schwab at suse dot de 2007-05-22 21:32 ---
Because the standard says so?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32023
--- Comment #7 from schwab at suse dot de 2007-05-22 21:51 ---
Everything is according to the standard. That's where C is defined.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32023
--- Comment #1 from schwab at suse dot de 2007-05-21 15:45 ---
A cast is not an lvalue.
--
schwab at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status
--- Comment #2 from schwab at suse dot de 2007-05-20 18:03 ---
You must have been using a modified version of config.guess, the respective
line hasn't changed since it was added 6 years ago.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32011
--- Comment #1 from schwab at suse dot de 2007-05-20 18:29 ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 32011 ***
--
schwab at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from schwab at suse dot de 2007-05-20 18:29 ---
*** Bug 32012 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32011
--- Comment #4 from schwab at suse dot de 2007-05-12 09:15 ---
*** Bug 31904 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
schwab at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from schwab at suse dot de 2007-05-12 09:15 ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 30745 ***
--
schwab at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #4 from schwab at suse dot de 2007-04-29 19:06 ---
It looks like you have modified configure. Please try again with an unmodified
configure.
--
schwab at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from schwab at suse dot de 2007-04-29 19:20 ---
Confirmed. Only happens with -Os.
--
schwab at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from schwab at suse dot de 2007-04-29 19:56 ---
Created an attachment (id=13463)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=13463action=view)
Reduced testcase
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30663
--- Comment #4 from schwab at suse dot de 2007-04-29 20:37 ---
This is no longer reproducible with current mainline.
--
schwab at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from schwab at suse dot de 2007-04-29 23:17 ---
That was fixed in mainline at revision 122520.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30663
--- Comment #2 from schwab at suse dot de 2007-04-26 12:18 ---
There is no implicit cast here. a[b] is the same as (*((a)+(b))), and since
addition is commutative, this is the same as (b)[a].
--
schwab at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #40 from schwab at suse dot de 2007-04-25 15:46 ---
Closing for now.
--
schwab at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED
--- Comment #1 from schwab at suse dot de 2007-04-18 15:24 ---
Either use g++ or link with -lstdc++.
--
schwab at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from schwab at suse dot de 2007-04-18 15:27 ---
Reopening since it's a problem with libstdc++ configure.
--
schwab at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
Version: 4.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: schwab at suse dot de
GCC target triplet: ia64-suse-linux
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id
--- Comment #1 from schwab at suse dot de 2007-04-13 10:14 ---
Created an attachment (id=13361)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=13361action=view)
vect-4.f90.097t.vect
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31561
: wrong-code
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: schwab at suse dot de
GCC target triplet: powerpc-suse-linux
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31562
--- Comment #2 from schwab at suse dot de 2007-04-13 11:01 ---
The modified test works at least with -O0, both 32bit and 64bit.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31562
--- Comment #1 from schwab at suse dot de 2007-04-09 13:08 ---
Don't write beyond array bounds.
--
schwab at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status
--- Comment #1 from schwab at suse dot de 2007-04-05 10:31 ---
Not a bug. You must call va_start/va_end whenever you want to reuse a va_list.
--
schwab at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from schwab at suse dot de 2007-04-05 10:47 ---
7.15 Variable arguments stdarg.h
3 [...] The object ap may be passed as an argument to another function; if that
function invokes the va_arg macro with parameter ap, the value of ap in the
calling function is indeterminate
--- Comment #32 from schwab at suse dot de 2007-04-02 20:42 ---
unwind-compat is _required_ for the system libunwind.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26792
--- Comment #4 from schwab at suse dot de 2007-03-31 08:56 ---
You need to put it at the top of the file.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31407
--- Comment #15 from schwab at suse dot de 2007-03-31 10:18 ---
This still does not work. When configuring the stage2 compiler the symbol will
be found in libgcc_s (from unwind-compat.o).
--
schwab at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #16 from schwab at suse dot de 2007-03-31 10:28 ---
Also why does configure set HAVE_GETIPINFO unconditionally when the system
libunwind is used?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27880
--- Comment #30 from schwab at suse dot de 2007-03-31 10:57 ---
The configure check is finding the definition of _Unwind_GetIPInfo in libgcc_s
(from unwind-compat.o) when configuring with --with-system-libunwind.
--
schwab at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #5 from schwab at suse dot de 2007-03-27 16:36 ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 28911 ***
--
schwab at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #10 from schwab at suse dot de 2007-03-27 16:36 ---
*** Bug 31324 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
schwab at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #4 from schwab at suse dot de 2007-03-24 08:26 ---
(In reply to comment #2)
Note that the newly built bootstrap compiler fails the configure tests which
have a trailing -V on the command line.
This is harmless, it's only for informational purpose (various tries to make
--- Comment #11 from schwab at suse dot de 2007-03-23 15:09 ---
The calloc function allocates space for an array of nmemb objects, each of
whose size is size.
There is no mentioning of overflow, but the allocated space must surely be big
enough to hold the array, and calloc shall fail
--- Comment #1 from schwab at suse dot de 2007-03-14 17:19 ---
The standard has no such requirement. It only talks about non-zero value.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31175
--- 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 #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 #2 from schwab at suse dot de 2007-03-11 15:02 ---
The limit on the number of tree codes is reached (LAST_CPLUS_TREE_CODE = 251,
LAST_OBJC_TREE_CODE = 262).
--
schwab at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from schwab at suse dot de 2007-03-11 23:51 ---
In C++ the comma before ... is optional.
Where syntactically correct, #8220;, ...#8221; is synonymous with
#8220;...#8221;.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31138
--- Comment #2 from schwab at suse dot de 2007-03-01 14:37 ---
Why do you think efff is wrong?
--
schwab at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #4 from schwab at suse dot de 2007-03-01 15:00 ---
Shifting unsigned numbers doesn't replicate the sign bit.
--
schwab at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority: P3
Component: debug
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: schwab at suse dot de
GCC target triplet: ia64-*-linux
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30986
--- Comment #24 from schwab at suse dot de 2007-02-27 21:54 ---
ICE's with every optimization level.
--
schwab at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from schwab at suse dot de 2007-02-24 08:21 ---
This is how C++ works, see [dcl.type.elab]/3.
--
schwab at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from schwab at suse dot de 2007-02-19 16:42 ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 5291 ***
--
schwab at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #17 from schwab at suse dot de 2007-02-19 16:42 ---
*** Bug 30861 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=5291
--- Comment #1 from schwab at suse dot de 2007-02-17 10:16 ---
Your sysroot is missing the kernel headers. There should be a dependency of
glibc-devel on the appropriate package that contains them.
--
schwab at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #3 from schwab at suse dot de 2007-02-17 12:12 ---
Please show the output of ls
/home/Marco/Desktop/compile-lin-lin/gcc-XYZXYZ-lin/sys-root/usr/include/linux/errno.h.
--
schwab at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from schwab at suse dot de 2007-02-17 14:31 ---
$SYS_ROOT/include has no significance. The standard include directory is
/usr/include, and sysroot mirrors exactly the standard directory layout.
--
schwab at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #3 from schwab at suse dot de 2007-02-15 09:40 ---
It is not a small command line passed to gcc but one enormous command line
passed to /bin/bash.
This is wrong. The executed command is gcc, and it only needs 500 bytes of
argument space.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org
--- Comment #2 from schwab at suse dot de 2007-02-12 21:48 ---
You never send EOF.
--
schwab at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: rtl-optimization
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: schwab at suse dot de
GCC target triplet: powerpc-suse-linux
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30761
--- Comment #1 from schwab at suse dot de 2007-02-04 15:47 ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 30699 ***
--
schwab at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from schwab at suse dot de 2007-02-04 15:47 ---
*** Bug 30698 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30699
--- Comment #1 from schwab at suse dot de 2007-02-03 15:15 ---
.hpp is not a recognized extension. If you want the file to be treated as a
C++ header precede it with `-xc++-header'.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30692
--- Comment #1 from schwab at suse dot de 2007-01-26 20:04 ---
(50L * rowsetSize * recordLength) overflows when long is a 32 bit type.
--
schwab at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libstdc++
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: schwab at suse dot de
GCC target triplet: ia64-*-*
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30586
--- Comment #9 from schwab at suse dot de 2007-01-25 17:47 ---
Use -Wcast-align.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30581
--- Comment #3 from schwab at suse dot de 2007-01-25 23:40 ---
Yes, config/cpu/ia64/atomic_word.h already existed before 4.2, but it wasn't
picked up until this:
2006-07-14 Benjamin Kosnik [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* configure.host: Simplify.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla
--- Comment #3 from schwab at suse dot de 2007-01-22 14:51 ---
See *_FLAGS_TO_PASS in toplevel makefile.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30541
--- Comment #1 from schwab at suse dot de 2007-01-20 16:07 ---
macro.c: In function #8216;main#8217;:
macro.c:18: warning: format #8216;%lu#8217; expects type #8216;long
unsigned int#8217;, but
argument 2 has type #8216;long long unsigned int#8217;
macro.c:19: warning: format
--- Comment #9 from schwab at suse dot de 2007-01-15 13:38 ---
Any news on this one? AFAICS Richard Sandiford was ok with the patch.
--
schwab at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
: build
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libgcj
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: schwab at suse dot de
GCC target triplet: ia64-*-*
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30422
--- Comment #1 from schwab at suse dot de 2007-01-10 20:37 ---
strndup is a GNU extension and is only declared in string.h when _GNU_SOURCE
is defined.
--
schwab at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #8 from schwab at suse dot de 2007-01-01 22:11 ---
Fixed for 4.2+.
--
schwab at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
--- Comment #5 from schwab at suse dot de 2006-12-13 10:37 ---
On ia64 it is crashing in libiberty/md5.c.
--
schwab at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from schwab at suse dot de 2006-11-27 09:51 ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 21920 ***
--
schwab at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #108 from schwab at suse dot de 2006-11-27 09:51 ---
*** Bug 29991 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
schwab at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from schwab at suse dot de 2006-11-24 10:34 ---
Your program is invoking undefined behaviour. You should not perform the
division if the divisor is zero.
--
schwab at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #9 from schwab at suse dot de 2006-11-10 16:27 ---
(In reply to comment #7)
combine.c:find_split_point: When the destination is a zero_extract, it does
adjust the bitpos when BITS_BIG_ENDIAN, but it doesn't look at
BYTES_BIT_ENDIAN at all.
I think this is ok, because
--- Comment #3 from schwab at suse dot de 2006-11-09 10:00 ---
And '\377' 0, so the warning is correct.
--
schwab at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from schwab at suse dot de 2006-11-08 14:29 ---
Conversions from pointer types to integer types are implementation defined.
GCC sign extends when converting a pointer to a wider integer. See
http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-3.4.6/gcc/Arrays-and-pointers
--- Comment #1 from schwab at suse dot de 2006-11-07 11:47 ---
That appears to be broken as far back as gcc 3.0: all 3.x versions do not
recognize either of the two forms, since 4.0 only the second form is
recognized. Both 2.95 and 2.7 can optimize both forms (tested on m68k
--- Comment #1 from schwab at suse dot de 2006-11-06 13:55 ---
The warning works as intended.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 6614 ***
--
schwab at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #10 from schwab at suse dot de 2006-11-06 13:55 ---
*** Bug 29739 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
schwab at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from schwab at suse dot de 2006-10-24 16:02 ---
The evaluation order of function arguments is not specified. If you depend on
side effects to be carried out at a specific point you must make sure there is
a sequence point at the appropriate place.
--
schwab at suse
--- Comment #1 from schwab at suse dot de 2006-10-19 08:39 ---
That's not a bug, the result of -2147483648/-1 is overflowing the range of int,
thus invokes undefined behaviour.
--
schwab at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from schwab at suse dot de 2006-10-01 17:23 ---
port_outl is broken, long is 64 bits on x86-64.
--
schwab at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: schwab at suse dot de
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29270
--- Comment #1 from schwab at suse dot de 2006-09-28 11:21 ---
See also the thread at
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/automake/2006-09/msg00081.html.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29270
--- Comment #1 from schwab at suse dot de 2006-09-23 17:29 ---
This is part of -Wparentheses since gcc 4.0.
--
schwab at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from schwab at suse dot de 2006-09-19 11:19 ---
Doesn't change anything either. I don't think this function is ever called
anyway.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29127
problem, executable not found
Product: gcc
Version: 4.1.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: major
Priority: P3
Component: ada
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: schwab at suse dot de
http://gcc.gnu.org
--- Comment #3 from schwab at suse dot de 2006-09-18 19:29 ---
That didn't change anything.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29127
--- Comment #1 from schwab at suse dot de 2006-09-13 15:32 ---
A label can only be part of a statement. A declaration is not a statement.
--
schwab at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: wrong-code
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: schwab at suse dot de
GCC target triplet: s390-*-*
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28789
--- Comment #1 from schwab at suse dot de 2006-08-21 12:33 ---
Created an attachment (id=12109)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=12109action=view)
Testcase
$ gcc -O2 sha512.c ; ./a.out ; echo $?
1
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28789
--- Comment #3 from schwab at suse dot de 2006-08-21 14:27 ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 28146 ***
--
schwab at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #9 from schwab at suse dot de 2006-08-21 14:27 ---
*** Bug 28789 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
schwab at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: schwab at suse dot de
GCC target triplet: ia64-suse-linux
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28784
--- Comment #1 from schwab at suse dot de 2006-08-20 09:36 ---
Created an attachment (id=12103)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=12103action=view)
Diff of objdump -d output
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28784
--- Comment #2 from schwab at suse dot de 2006-08-20 14:21 ---
Created an attachment (id=12104)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=12104action=view)
Diff of compiler dumps
All dumps before mach are identical.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28784
--- Comment #3 from schwab at suse dot de 2006-08-20 14:29 ---
Created an attachment (id=12105)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=12105action=view)
stage3 mach dump
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28784
--- Comment #4 from schwab at suse dot de 2006-08-20 15:24 ---
The bug is very sensitive on the environment size. Adding -da makes it go
away, adding -da -da makes it reappear. Looks like some decision is made on
the low bits of an address.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla
: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: schwab at suse dot de
GCC target triplet: ia64-*-*
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28772
--- Comment #1 from schwab at suse dot de 2006-08-18 11:49 ---
Created an attachment (id=12092)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=12092action=view)
Testcase
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28772
--- Comment #3 from schwab at suse dot de 2006-08-18 14:50 ---
scheduling:6473.35 (100%) usr 0.60 (88%) sys6473.98 (100%) wall
499608 kB (90%) ggc
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28772
--- Comment #10 from schwab at suse dot de 2006-08-15 15:22 ---
The first hunk generates a warning since tree != void *.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28672
Priority: P3
Component: target
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: schwab at suse dot de
GCC target triplet: powerpc-*-linux
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28702
201 - 300 of 649 matches
Mail list logo
