[Bug bootstrap/45445] [4.6 regression] ARM bootstrap failure: comparison failures after stage 3

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45445 --- Comment #25 from Laurent GUERBY laurent at guerby dot net 2010-09-29 07:08:58 UTC --- On armv5tel-unknown-linux-gnueabi with this patch at r164682 I still hit PR44970 so bootstrap failed. Mikael what made your bootstrap succeed?

[Bug fortran/45827] New: mio_component_ref(): Component not found when mixing f90 and f03 in large projects

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45827 Summary: mio_component_ref(): Component not found when mixing f90 and f03 in large projects Product: gcc Version: 4.6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug rtl-optimization/45813] alias analysis problem ?

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45813 --- Comment #7 from Darren Jenkins darrenrjenkins at gmail dot com 2010-09-29 07:46:54 UTC --- OK CrossWorks don't use/ship the GCC compiler driver. So I guess all the usefull information I can give is from the c compiler: cc1 --version GNU C

[Bug fortran/45827] mio_component_ref(): Component not found when mixing f90 and f03 in large projects

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45827 Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at pci dot uzh.ch changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug fortran/45827] [4.6 Regression] ice in create_int_parameter_array

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45827 Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at pci dot uzh.ch changed: What|Removed |Added CC|

[Bug target/43892] PowerPC suboptimal add with carry optimization

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43892 --- Comment #18 from joakim.tjernlund at transmode dot se joakim.tjernlund at transmode dot se 2010-09-29 09:02:49 UTC --- I hope you don't mind me asking for status again(because I am curious)? Upgraded to gcc 4.4.4 now and I noticed one

[Bug rtl-optimization/45813] alias analysis problem ?

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45813 Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |UNCONFIRMED

[Bug fortran/45827] [4.6 Regression] ice in create_int_parameter_array

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45827 --- Comment #3 from Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-09-29 09:57:57 UTC --- Joost what's the version of your GCC? There was a bug fix (Bug 45793) on Saturday. Thus, if it occurs with Hans-Werner's 4.6.0 20100921, I am not surprised.

[Bug fortran/45827] [4.6 Regression] ice in create_int_parameter_array

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45827 --- Comment #4 from Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at pci dot uzh.ch 2010-09-29 10:18:15 UTC --- Oh... I'm using an old version ;) gcc version 4.6.0 20100925 (experimental) [trunk revision 164618] (GCC). I'll update and check again.

[Bug fortran/45827] [4.6 Regression] ice in create_int_parameter_array

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45827 Mikael Morin mikael at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mikael at gcc dot

[Bug bootstrap/33396] add --enable-intermodule

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33396 Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING

[Bug fortran/45827] [4.6 Regression] ice in create_int_parameter_array

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45827 Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at pci dot uzh.ch changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW

[Bug bootstrap/37627] In function `fold_builtin_1': undefined reference to `mpfr_j0'

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37627 Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED

[Bug fortran/45828] New: No default initialization of derived type members?

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45828 Summary: No default initialization of derived type members? Product: gcc Version: 4.6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: fortran

[Bug c++/42033] libstdc++ seems to miss std::basic_stringchar, std::char_traitschar, std::allocatorchar ::basic_stringchar*(char*, char*, std::allocatorchar const)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42033 Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING

[Bug libmudflap/38339] libtool: compile: not configured to build any kind of library

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38339 --- Comment #14 from Gabor Z. Papp gzp at gmx dot net 2010-09-29 11:04:26 UTC --- $ getconf ARG_MAX 2097152 Problem still exist with 4.4.4

[Bug middle-end/37770] static structures initialization, undefined reference to `_0'

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37770 Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||manu at gcc

[Bug middle-end/37770] static structures initialization, undefined reference to `_0'

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37770 Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED

[Bug bootstrap/45445] [4.6 regression] ARM bootstrap failure: comparison failures after stage 3

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45445 --- Comment #26 from Mikael Pettersson mikpe at it dot uu.se 2010-09-29 11:07:32 UTC --- (In reply to comment #25) On armv5tel-unknown-linux-gnueabi with this patch at r164682 I still hit PR44970 so bootstrap failed. Mikael what made your

[Bug fortran/45828] [4.6 Regression] No default initialization of derived type members?

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45828 Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at pci dot uzh.ch changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug bootstrap/33396] add --enable-intermodule

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33396 Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED

[Bug fortran/45828] [4.6 Regression] No default initialization of derived type members?

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45828 --- Comment #1 from jpr at csc dot fi 2010-09-29 11:20:40 UTC --- the attached program misbehaves using gfortran 4.6 (i think). The supposed output is: 0.000 using gfortran 4.6 i get 0.000 5 T 6 T 10 T

[Bug fortran/45827] mio_component_ref(): Component not found when mixing f90 and f03 in large projects

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45827 Mikael Morin mikael at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED

[Bug fortran/45827] mio_component_ref(): Component not found when mixing f90 and f03 in large projects

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45827 Mikael Morin mikael at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|REOPENED|WAITING ---

[Bug fortran/45827] mio_component_ref(): Component not found when mixing f90 and f03 in large projects

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45827 --- Comment #9 from Hans-Werner Boschmann boschmann at tp1 dot physik.uni-siegen.de 2010-09-29 11:49:11 UTC --- My makefile is now: FC=gfortran FFLAGS=-ffree-form -ffree-line-length-0 -I. -L. all: common.o common_module.mod arguments.o

[Bug libstdc++/43554] profile-mode version of forward_list missing

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43554 --- Comment #6 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com 2010-09-29 12:01:16 UTC --- The debug-mode bits are now in. It would be nice to have the profile-mode bits too for 4.6.0...

[Bug c++/45829] New: Unary minus on static const class variable triggering linker error

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45829 Summary: Unary minus on static const class variable triggering linker error Product: gcc Version: 4.4.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3

[Bug fortran/45827] mio_component_ref(): Component not found when mixing f90 and f03 in large projects

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45827 --- Comment #10 from Mikael Morin mikael at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-09-29 12:44:03 UTC --- (In reply to comment #9) The result: gfortran -ffree-form -ffree-line-length-0 -I. -L. -c kinds.f90 -o kinds.o gfortran -ffree-form -ffree-line-length-0

[Bug c++/45829] Unary minus on static const class variable triggering linker error

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45829 Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED

[Bug fortran/25708] Module loading is not good at all

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25708 Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||burnus at gcc

[Bug c++/45829] Unary minus on static const class variable triggering linker error

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45829 --- Comment #2 from Sander Land sander.land at gmail dot com 2010-09-29 12:49:23 UTC --- I did define the constant, though now see the attachment apparently failed? Full text below: struct x { static const double a = 3.14; double f() {

[Bug c++/45829] Unary minus on static const class variable triggering linker error

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45829 --- Comment #3 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-09-29 12:53:52 UTC --- You didn't. A definition would be const double x::a; at file-scope. Your definition is a declaration.

[Bug fortran/45828] [4.6 Regression] No default initialization of derived type members?

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45828 Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||burnus at gcc

[Bug c++/45829] Unary minus on static const class variable triggering linker error

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45829 --- Comment #4 from Sander Land sander.land at gmail dot com 2010-09-29 13:05:45 UTC --- (In reply to comment #3) You didn't. A definition would be const double x::a; at file-scope. Your definition is a declaration. Fair enough, I

[Bug c++/45829] Unary minus on static const class variable triggering linker error

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45829 Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC|

[Bug ada/45830] New: [4.4/4.5/4.6 Regression] Code+rodata increase with -ftree-switch-conversion

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45830 Summary: [4.4/4.5/4.6 Regression] Code+rodata increase with -ftree-switch-conversion Product: gcc Version: 4.6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3

[Bug tree-optimization/45830] [4.4/4.5/4.6 Regression] Code+rodata increase with -ftree-switch-conversion

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45830 Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last

[Bug c/45831] New: 0 = 10 (with -O0, 0 = 0 with -O1, but 10 = 10 expected)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45831 Summary: 0 = 10 (with -O0, 0 = 0 with -O1, but 10 = 10 expected) Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3

[Bug c/45831] 0 = 10 (with -O0, 0 = 0 with -O1, but 10 = 10 expected)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45831 Andreas Schwab sch...@linux-m68k.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED

[Bug bootstrap/37888] make install fails attempting to build gcc/intl.c

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37888 --- Comment #2 from Craig Powers craig.powers at gmail dot com 2010-09-29 13:42:58 UTC --- I'll try to find time to try again. I'm no longer at school as I was when I reported the bug originally; I still have access to the systems I was using

[Bug bootstrap/37888] make install fails attempting to build gcc/intl.c

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37888 --- Comment #2 from Craig Powers craig.powers at gmail dot com 2010-09-29 13:42:58 UTC --- I'll try to find time to try again. I'm no longer at school as I was when I reported the bug originally; I still have access to the systems I was using

[Bug bootstrap/37888] make install fails attempting to build gcc/intl.c

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37888 --- Comment #3 from Craig Powers craig.powers at gmail dot com 2010-09-29 13:43:02 UTC --- I'll try to find time to try again. I'm no longer at school as I was when I reported the bug originally; I still have access to the systems I was using

[Bug c/45832] New: Build on AIX5.3-PowerPC failed

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45832 Summary: Build on AIX5.3-PowerPC failed Product: gcc Version: 4.4.4 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c AssignedTo: unassig...@gcc.gnu.org

[Bug tree-optimization/45833] New: Unnecessary runtime versioning for aliasing

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45833 Summary: Unnecessary runtime versioning for aliasing Product: gcc Version: 4.6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: missed-optimization Severity: normal Priority: P3

[Bug c/45831] 0 = 10 (with -O0, 0 = 0 with -O1, but 10 = 10 expected)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45831 --- Comment #2 from Michiel MichieldeB at aim dot com 2010-09-29 14:20:29 UTC --- That does not mean that it is a very bad idea to use another library for precomputation.

[Bug c/45831] 0 = 10 (with -O0, 0 = 0 with -O1, but 10 = 10 expected)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45831 --- Comment #3 from Michiel MichieldeB at aim dot com 2010-09-29 14:22:39 UTC --- Still it is a very bad idea to use another library for precomputation.

[Bug c/45831] 0 = 10 (with -O0, 0 = 0 with -O1, but 10 = 10 expected)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45831 --- Comment #4 from Michiel MichieldeB at aim dot com 2010-09-29 14:29:54 UTC --- In case you are missing the point, most non-bug posters compile on their target machine.

[Bug c/45834] New: Redundant inter-loop edges in DDG

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45834 Summary: Redundant inter-loop edges in DDG Product: gcc Version: 4.6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c AssignedTo:

[Bug target/45835] New: Consider push simm8;pop reg for -Os

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45835 Summary: Consider push simm8;pop reg for -Os Product: gcc Version: 4.6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: target AssignedTo:

[Bug preprocessor/45386] [4.6 Regression] valgrind reports out-of-bounds read in search_line_sse2

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45386 Tom Tromey tromey at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED

[Bug c/45831] 0 = 10 (with -O0, 0 = 0 with -O1, but 10 = 10 expected)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45831 --- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-09-29 14:59:22 UTC --- (In reply to comment #4) In case you are missing the point, most non-bug posters compile on their target machine. In C/C++, shifting by a negative

[Bug bootstrap/45832] Build on AIX5.3-PowerPC failed

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45832 Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Component|c |bootstrap ---

[Bug bootstrap/45832] Build on AIX5.3-PowerPC failed

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45832 Stefan Winter stefanwin at gmx dot net changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED

[Bug c/45831] 0 = 10 (with -O0, 0 = 0 with -O1, but 10 = 10 expected)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45831 --- Comment #6 from Michiel MichieldeB at aim dot com 2010-09-29 15:19:11 UTC --- If undefined behavior only depends on the machine (most times compiling machine and target machine are the same), then there will be less bias here.

[Bug c++/44092] Undefined Symbol: std::basic_string

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44092 Stefan Winter stefanwin at gmx dot net changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED

[Bug c/45831] 0 = 10 (with -O0, 0 = 0 with -O1, but 10 = 10 expected)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45831 Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||manu at gcc

[Bug c/45831] 0 = 10 (with -O0, 0 = 0 with -O1, but 10 = 10 expected)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45831 --- Comment #8 from Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-09-29 15:28:11 UTC --- Why don't we just not compile programs with evident undefined behaviour? I think the standard allows us to do so.

[Bug rtl-optimization/45621] [4.6 Regression] ICE: verify_cgraph_node failed: inlined_to pointer is set but no predecessors found with -fipa-cp-clone -flto

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45621 Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P1 ---

[Bug rtl-optimization/45652] [4.6 Regression] gcc.dg/compat/scalar-by-value-3 FAILs with -O2 -fselective-scheduling2

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45652 Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P1

[Bug middle-end/45662] [4.6 regression] New x86 test failures

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45662 Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED

[Bug c++/45829] Unary minus on static const class variable triggering linker error

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45829 Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||manu at gcc

[Bug target/45670] [4.6 Regression] Less efficient x86 addressing mode selection on 4.6, causes -Os size regression from 4.5

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45670 Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P2

[Bug rtl-optimization/45685] [4.6 Regression] GCC optimizer for Intel x64 generates inefficient code

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45685 Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords|

[Bug middle-end/45699] [4.6 Regression] Incorrect copy constructor generated with -O

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45699 Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||wrong-code

[Bug lto/45702] [4.6 Regression] New LTO test failures

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45702 Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED

[Bug middle-end/45712] [4.6 Regression] Segmentation violation when compiling spec source on either x86 or ppc with debugging

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45712 Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED

[Bug middle-end/45720] [4.6 regression] Revision 164367 miscompiled SPEC CPU 2K

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45720 Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P1

[Bug c/45831] 0 = 10 (with -O0, 0 = 0 with -O1, but 10 = 10 expected)

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45831 --- Comment #9 from joseph at codesourcery dot com joseph at codesourcery dot com 2010-09-29 15:43:02 UTC --- On Wed, 29 Sep 2010, manu at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: Why don't we just not compile programs with evident undefined behaviour? I think

[Bug middle-end/45722] [4.6 Regression] FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20040709-2.c execution at -O1 and -Os

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45722 Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||wrong-code

[Bug tree-optimization/45733] [4.6 Regression] ICE: verify_stmts failed: invalid conversion in gimple call with -fstrict-overflow -ftree-vectorize

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45733 Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P1

[Bug lto/45736] [4.6 Regression] ICE: in cgraph_remove_unreachable_nodes, at ipa.c:245 with -flto and attribute((constructor))

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45736 Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P1

[Bug fortran/45836] New: Fortran 2003 - Type Bound Procedure Error - Type Mismatch

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45836 Summary: Fortran 2003 - Type Bound Procedure Error - Type Mismatch Product: gcc Version: 4.6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3

[Bug fortran/45836] [OOP] Fortran 2003 - Type Bound Procedure Error - Type Mismatch

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45836 Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||rejects-valid

[Bug target/43725] Poor instructions selection, scheduling and registers allocation for ARM NEON intrinsics

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43725 Richard Earnshaw rearnsha at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed|2010-05-11 07:35:23 |2010-09-29

[Bug treelang/45761] [4.6 regression] ICE: segmentation fault at gcc/expr.c:9863

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45761 Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |4.6.0

[Bug target/45761] [4.6 regression] ICE: segmentation fault at gcc/expr.c:9863

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45761 Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last

[Bug bootstrap/45796] [4.6 regression] make targets info-gcc, dvi-gcc etc. should work from unbuilt configured tree

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45796 Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |4.6.0

[Bug target/45761] [4.6 regression] ICE: segmentation fault at gcc/expr.c:9863

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45761 gee jojelino at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED

[Bug web/45769] Bugzilla help doesn't match actual fields

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45769 --- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-09-29 17:04:41 UTC --- Related to PR 36739 (I think some of the custom fields are mentioned there too).

[Bug target/45790] 1308 new GCC h...@164592 regressions

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45790 Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Component|lto |target

[Bug target/45790] [4.6 Regression] rs6000 builtin vs LTO

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45790 Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Target|powerpc-apple-darwin9 |powerpc*-*-*

[Bug target/45790] [4.6 Regression] rs6000 builtin vs LTO

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45790 --- Comment #6 from Iain Sandoe iains at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-09-29 17:26:51 UTC --- (In reply to comment #5) rs6000_builtin_decl should be working correctly. Indeed, I suspect it is because we patch the builtin names to append $LDBL128 for

[Bug lto/45729] -flto conflicts with -mthumb

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45729 Rafaël Carré rafael.carre at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED

[Bug bootstrap/45796] [4.6 regression] make targets info-gcc, dvi-gcc etc. should work from unbuilt configured tree

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45796 Ralf Wildenhues rwild at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED

[Bug preprocessor/45362] [4.6 Regression] Dangling reference about saved cpp_macro for push/pop macro

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45362 --- Comment #18 from Kai Tietz ktietz at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-09-29 18:18:42 UTC --- Author: ktietz Date: Wed Sep 29 18:18:38 2010 New Revision: 164729 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=164729 Log: 2010-09-29 Kai Tietz

[Bug preprocessor/45362] [4.6 Regression] Dangling reference about saved cpp_macro for push/pop macro

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45362 Kai Tietz ktietz at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED

[Bug rtl-optimization/45788] [4.6 Regression] -fwhole-program causes ICE error: BB 3 can not throw but has an EH edge

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45788 Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last

[Bug rtl-optimization/45352] ICE: in reset_sched_cycles_in_current_ebb, at sel-sched.c:7058

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45352 --- Comment #9 from Zdenek Sojka zsojka at seznam dot cz 2010-09-29 19:02:45 UTC --- Sorry, forgot to mention command line: $ gcc -O1 -freorder-blocks -fschedule-insns2 -funswitch-loops -fselective-scheduling2 -fsel-sched-pipelining

[Bug target/45790] [4.6 Regression] rs6000 builtin vs LTO

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45790 Jack Howarth howarth at nitro dot med.uc.edu changed: What|Removed |Added CC||howarth at

[Bug libmudflap/38339] libtool: compile: not configured to build any kind of library

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38339 --- Comment #15 from Ralf Wildenhues rwild at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-09-29 19:33:50 UTC --- Please attach i686-pc-linux-gnu/libmudflap/config.log Please post the output of the following commands (modifying the configure script to post verbose

[Bug rtl-optimization/45813] alias analysis problem ?

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45813 --- Comment #9 from Mikael Pettersson mikpe at it dot uu.se 2010-09-29 19:41:08 UTC --- I can reproduce it with crosses to arm-elf and arm-linux-gnueabi. The combination of -mthumb (1 not 2) and -fno-omit-frame-pointer is the trigger. GCC 4.3.5

[Bug target/40457] use stm and ldm to access consecutive memory words

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40457 --- Comment #13 from Bernd Schmidt bernds at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-09-29 20:06:58 UTC --- Author: bernds Date: Wed Sep 29 20:06:55 2010 New Revision: 164732 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=164732 Log: PR target/40457 *

[Bug tree-optimization/45833] Unnecessary runtime versioning for aliasing

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45833 Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||spop at gcc dot

[Bug fortran/45836] [OOP] Fortran 2003 - Type Bound Procedure Error - Type Mismatch

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45836 --- Comment #2 from ortp21 at gmail dot com 2010-09-29 20:24:24 UTC --- Tobias, Thank you for the workaround variants. I have used them instead of what I was trying to do, with success. I hope the bug report was worthwhile/accurate.

[Bug lto/45810] 40% slowdown when using LTO for a single-file program

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45810 --- Comment #9 from Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr 2010-09-29 20:27:36 UTC --- (In reply to comment #8) Using -fno-inline-functions, the program recovers the speed of the no-LTO version. This is weird!-( I have done the

[Bug bootstrap/45816] [4.6 Regression] Bootstrap comparison failure! for powerpc-apple-darwin9 with --enable-checking=release

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45816 --- Comment #3 from Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr 2010-09-29 20:43:45 UTC --- The failing comparison is [karma] gcc/rel_build% ../_gcc_clean/contrib/compare-debug stage2-gcc/cfghooks.o stage3-gcc/cfghooks.o

[Bug bootstrap/45796] [4.6 regression] make targets info-gcc, dvi-gcc etc. should work from unbuilt configured tree

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45796 --- Comment #2 from Ralf Wildenhues rwild at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-09-29 20:50:16 UTC --- Patches posted: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-09/msg02312.html http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-09/msg02313.html I don't see where this would

[Bug rtl-optimization/45813] alias analysis problem ?

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45813 --- Comment #10 from Mikael Pettersson mikpe at it dot uu.se 2010-09-29 20:59:17 UTC --- This was fixed for 4.6 by r160260: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=revisionrevision=160260 Applying that to 4.5 changes 4.5's output to: ReadLE16U:

[Bug c/45054] [4.6 Regression] struct-by-value-1.c fail.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45054 --- Comment #2 from Bernd Schmidt bernds at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-09-29 21:12:52 UTC --- Author: bernds Date: Wed Sep 29 21:12:48 2010 New Revision: 164733 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=164733 Log: PR c/45054 *

[Bug target/32523] disastrous scheduling for POWER5

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32523 --- Comment #9 from David Fang fang at csl dot cornell.edu 2010-09-29 21:36:02 UTC --- Out of curiosity, any benchmark updates on more recent releases?

  1   2   >