http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46244
--- Comment #16 from paul.richard.thomas at gmail dot com paul.richard.thomas
at gmail dot com 2011-02-21 08:25:51 UTC ---
Dear Mikael,
snip
Actually none of the gfc_compare_type/gfc_TK_compatible changes are absolutely
necessary to
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47796
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39029
--- Comment #3 from Olaf van der Spek olafvdspek at gmail dot com 2011-02-21
09:37:03 UTC ---
g++ -o b.h.gch a.h
g++ c.cpp
a.h:
#pragma once // a.h:1:9: warning: #pragma once in main file
c.cpp:
#include b.h
#include b.h // c.cpp:2:15: error:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47830
Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||build
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47822
--- Comment #15 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-02-21
09:44:34 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #11)
Could you try building with the patch on a ppc box if you have one, without
the
Fix to tree.c in it, so that it will fail,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47824
Olaf van der Spek olafvdspek at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42722
--- Comment #12 from Peter A. Bigot bigotp at acm dot org 2011-02-21 09:45:15
UTC ---
Created attachment 23418
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=23418
Test case (requires msp430 back end)
Sorry, I don't speak dejagnu well enough
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42722
--- Comment #13 from Peter A. Bigot bigotp at acm dot org 2011-02-21 09:45:52
UTC ---
Created attachment 23419
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=23419
Generated code before patch applied
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42722
--- Comment #14 from Peter A. Bigot bigotp at acm dot org 2011-02-21 09:46:30
UTC ---
Created attachment 23420
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=23420
Generated code after patch applied
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39570
Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus at gcc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42722
--- Comment #15 from Peter A. Bigot bigotp at acm dot org 2011-02-21 09:48:23
UTC ---
Created attachment 23421
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=23421
Fixes problem
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42722
--- Comment #16 from Peter A. Bigot bigotp at acm dot org 2011-02-21 09:50:00
UTC ---
I've now taken over the msp430 back end and created the attached patch and test
case. This is relative to the gcc trunk as of a couple weeks ago; still
present
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31469
--- Comment #1 from Peter A. Bigot bigotp at acm dot org 2011-02-21 09:51:24
UTC ---
Created attachment 23422
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=23422
Fixes problem (resubmit, lost due to collision)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31469
Peter A. Bigot bigotp at acm dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bigotp at acm dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47831
Summary: avoid if-convertion if the conditional instructions
and following conditional branch has the same
condition
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47822
--- Comment #16 from Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr
2011-02-21 10:03:36 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #15)
Could you try building with the patch on a ppc box if you have one, without
the
Fix to tree.c in it, so that it will
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47832
Summary: [4.6 Regression] ObjC errors on structures with
flexible data members
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47822
--- Comment #17 from Iain Sandoe iains at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-02-21 10:08:51
UTC ---
there was no intention to create a hack (or any other form of expedient work);
... if it is wrong, then it is likely a mistake on my part when importing the
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47348
Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47832
--- Comment #1 from Nicola Pero nicola at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-02-21 10:37:10
UTC ---
Hi Jakub,
@interface T
{
struct S *u;
};
@end
struct S * is a pointer, right ? So it's always the size of a pointer ?
In that case, I don't see any
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47830
--- Comment #2 from Kai-Uwe Eckhardt kuehro at gmx dot de 2011-02-21 10:38:16
UTC ---
Hi,
There are two errors
For those having - like me - problems to spot the second error:
static long double prechalf = nexafterl (0.5L,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47825
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||x86_64-*-*
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47832
Nicola Pero nicola at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47822
--- Comment #18 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-02-21
10:44:03 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #16)
(In reply to comment #15)
Could you try building with the patch on a ppc box if you have one,
without the
Fix to
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47827
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47830
--- Comment #3 from Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-02-21
11:19:33 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
well besides the typo nexfaterl
Well, that was actually the problem I had - my brain magically added the t
;-)
(For NetBSD there
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47832
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-02-21
12:02:58 UTC ---
As I said, I don't know ObjC, so if you could fix it, I'd appreciate it.
That said, ISO C99 allows:
struct A { int a; char b[]; };
struct A a; // Here
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47833
Summary: ICE during GC in gt_ggc_mx_pending_template
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47348
--- Comment #8 from Paul Thomas pault at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-02-21 12:06:42
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #7)
Any plan to backport the fix in revision 170317?
I had not planned so to do but would respond positively to popular pressure how
far
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47833
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47487
Alan Modra amodra at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47834
Summary: Compiler uses unsafe math optimizations even
-funsafe-math-optimizations is not given
Product: gcc
Version: 4.5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35797
Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47824
--- Comment #7 from Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-02-21
12:30:27 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #6)
I'll have a look.
However, I still think an option to really enable (almost) all warnings should
be added. I don't agree
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47834
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=323
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||stenedjo at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47824
--- Comment #8 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-02-21
12:39:28 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #6)
(In reply to comment #5)
It is implicitly in the manual as those that are not mentioned as enabled by
Wall or Wextra.
So The
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47824
--- Comment #9 from Olaf van der Spek olafvdspek at gmail dot com 2011-02-21
12:47:24 UTC ---
So The list in the manual already. is false.
The information is in the manual, even if not as an explicit list.
That's true, but not what was
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38306
--- Comment #23 from Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at pci dot uzh.ch
2011-02-21 12:53:30 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #22)
What is the performance with 4.3 -O2?
4.3:
gfortran -O2 -march=native -funroll-loops -ffast-math test.f90 ;
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47824
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31573
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-02-21
12:55:51 UTC ---
*** Bug 47824 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40850
Mikael Morin mikael at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mikael at gcc dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40850
--- Comment #13 from Mikael Morin mikael at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-02-21
13:01:23 UTC ---
Comment 5 is not affected by the double free as the allocatable components are
never allocated during the program, only the containing entity is.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47796
--- Comment #7 from qihua.dai at intel dot com 2011-02-21 13:02:41 UTC ---
Hi,
I used -Wall -O2. But no warning for this situation.
gcc will print strict-aliasing related warning.
struct tmp1_s tmp;
tmp.a = 0xc; // this code line is
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47832
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P2 |P4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47824
--- Comment #11 from Olaf van der Spek olafvdspek at gmail dot com 2011-02-21
13:11:04 UTC ---
Dup.
No kidding?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47567
Thomas Henlich thenlich at users dot sourceforge.net changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47820
--- Comment #3 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-02-21
13:38:54 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Feb 21 13:38:48 2011
New Revision: 170359
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=170359
Log:
2011-02-21 Richard
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47820
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47106
John David Anglin danglin at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||danglin at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47825
H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|hjl at gcc dot gnu.org |hjl.tools at gmail
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47567
--- Comment #21 from Jerry DeLisle jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-02-21
14:22:51 UTC ---
OK, can you tell I am time slicing this one. ;)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47199
Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47835
Summary: FAIL: gcc.dg/pr46909.c scan-tree-dump ifcombine
optimizing two comparisons to x_[0-9]+\(D\) != 4
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47567
--- Comment #22 from Jerry DeLisle jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-02-21
14:32:14 UTC ---
On my system I get with:
print *, --
print (F0.0), -0.0 ! = -0.
print (F3.0), -0.0 ! = -0.
print (F2.0), -0.0 !
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47832
--- Comment #4 from Nicola Pero nicola at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-02-21 14:33:14
UTC ---
for ObjC I guess it depends if in @interface there are variables (then
variables with flexible array members in theory could be treated there like
ISO
C99
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42108
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2009-11-19 16:49:51 |2011-02-21
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47778
--- Comment #4 from Jerry DeLisle jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-02-21
14:35:20 UTC ---
Status update. I have more or less isolated the problem in list-read.c. I do
not have an exact solution yet, but I am able to get the test case to work. I
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47835
--- Comment #1 from John David Anglin danglin at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-02-21
14:37:14 UTC ---
Created attachment 23426
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=23426
Tree dump.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47836
Summary: Some Cross Compiler can't build target-libiberty or
target-zlib
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47837
Summary: FAIL: gcc.dg/uninit-pred-7_a.c bogus warning (test for
bogus messages, line 26)
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47487
--- Comment #3 from Peter Bergner bergner at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-02-21
15:02:40 UTC ---
I don't recall anyone adding GO support for powerpc{,64}-linux, so I'm guessing
such a patch should be added when that is submitted?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46321
--- Comment #2 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-02-21 15:06:10 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #1)
Note: There are four cases where a polymorphic deallocate is needed - though
some might end up in the same code path:
- explicit DEALLOCATE (cf.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47207
Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47838
Summary: FAIL: gcc.dg/tree-ssa/foldconst-2.c scan-tree-dump-not
optimized fundamentals..0
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47838
--- Comment #1 from John David Anglin danglin at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-02-21
15:12:18 UTC ---
Created attachment 23427
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=23427
Tree dump.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47835
Mikael Pettersson mikpe at it dot uu.se changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mikpe at it dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47207
--- Comment #3 from Jason Merrill jason at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-02-21
15:35:52 UTC ---
Author: jason
Date: Mon Feb 21 15:35:44 2011
New Revision: 170365
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=170365
Log:
PR c++/47207
*
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38219
--- Comment #11 from John David Anglin danglin at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-02-21
15:51:59 UTC ---
Still fails on hppa1.1-hp-hpux10.20 with 4.6.0 revision 170207.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47106
--- Comment #17 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-02-21
15:53:54 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Mon Feb 21 15:53:49 2011
New Revision: 170366
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=170366
Log:
PR debug/47106
*
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47477
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.6.0 |4.7.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47839
Summary: ICE in dwarf2out.c:add_AT_specification
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: lto
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47839
--- Comment #1 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-02-21
16:19:20 UTC ---
--- a.f90
MODULE globalvar_mod
integer:: xstart, ystart, zstart, xstop, ystop, zstop
CONTAINS
END MODULE globalvar_mod
--- b.f90
MODULE PEC_mod
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47772
Jonathan 'Sky' Squirawski webmas...@sky-siteweb.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47802
--- Comment #6 from Jeffrey A. Law law at redhat dot com 2011-02-21 16:56:18
UTC ---
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 02/18/11 13:56, dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca wrote:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47802
---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47838
Mikael Pettersson mikpe at it dot uu.se changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mikpe at it dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47839
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47207
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46790
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-02-21
17:14:10 UTC ---
So, I've tried a few linkers from various RHEL/Fedora distros, and narrowed it
down to the fact that 20071102 ld still fails, while 20080208 ld already works.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46831
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46790
--- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-02-21
17:23:02 UTC ---
Created attachment 23428
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=23428
gcc46-pr46790-configury.patch
Completely untested draft of a configury patch
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44737
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44118
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rearnsha
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46790
--- Comment #10 from Jan Hubicka hubicka at ucw dot cz 2011-02-21 17:30:00
UTC ---
Testing datestamp seems resonable to me. I can do the changes needed to avoid
.text subsections then
(basically the elf implementation should then return NULL)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47833
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-02-21
17:32:22 UTC ---
Different testcase at https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=479920
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47802
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46178
--- Comment #2 from Jeffrey A. Law law at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-02-21 17:43:18
UTC ---
Author: law
Date: Mon Feb 21 17:43:15 2011
New Revision: 170370
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=170370
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/46178
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46002
--- Comment #2 from Jeffrey A. Law law at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-02-21 17:43:18
UTC ---
Author: law
Date: Mon Feb 21 17:43:15 2011
New Revision: 170370
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=170370
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/46178
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46178
Jeffrey A. Law law at redhat dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46790
--- Comment #11 from Steven Bosscher steven at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-02-21
17:47:14 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #7)
Interesting, I didn't know that :-)
Do you have an example?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46790
--- Comment #12 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-02-21
17:51:00 UTC ---
HAVE_GAS_HIDDEN and HAVE_COMDAT_GROUP checks use ld --version date too.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47802
--- Comment #8 from Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-02-21
18:08:13 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #6)
Certain implementations pass in a buffer size
parameter to deal with that problem, others (glibc) presumably do some
checking
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47840
Summary: incorrect _mm256_insert_epi{32,64} implementations
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47802
--- Comment #9 from Jeffrey A. Law law at redhat dot com 2011-02-21 18:49:02
UTC ---
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 02/21/11 10:41, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47802
Jakub
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47802
--- Comment #10 from Jeffrey A. Law law at redhat dot com 2011-02-21 18:51:09
UTC ---
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 02/21/11 11:09, burnus at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47802
---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47841
Summary: [4.6 Regression] New guality test failures
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: lto
AssignedTo:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47841
H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rguenth at gcc dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47802
--- Comment #11 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-02-21
18:58:27 UTC ---
In libgfortran it is not the user, but libgfortran implementation, so it makes
sure it always passes buffer of at least 26 bytes. If there are OSes where we
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47841
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47806
Steven Bosscher steven at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
1 - 100 of 137 matches
Mail list logo
