https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77492
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81803
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org |mpf at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82018
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81932
--- Comment #20 from Xi Ruoyao ---
(In reply to Martin Sebor from comment #18)
> GDB already has a C++ parser. It just isn't good enough. It understands
> that B and B are one and the same type but it
> interprets A<2> and A<2u> as distinct.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82026
Bug ID: 82026
Summary: Undemanglable symbol
Product: gcc
Version: 7.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: demangler
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82008
--- Comment #2 from Jörg Richter ---
My original intention was to use the attribute to skip the nullptr check when
up-casting.
So my preference is to optimize based on the attribute if possible.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81981
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82027
Bug ID: 82027
Summary: wrong code with -O3 -flto
Product: gcc
Version: 7.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: lto
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80767
--- Comment #3 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Tue Aug 29 19:40:55 2017
New Revision: 251427
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=251427=gcc=rev
Log:
PR c++/80767 - unnecessary instantiation of generic lambda
*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82021
--- Comment #1 from Marc Glisse ---
Did you try with -std=c++1z? (if that solves your issue, this is a DUP, it
should be enabled in all mode, but it isn't yet)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77492
--- Comment #2 from Danila ---
(In reply to Tim Shen from comment #1)
> Seems to be the same issue as 71500.
Even though I assume that that bug (71500) was fixed (even though the status is
still UNCONFIRMED) it haven't fixed the issue.
I tried
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71500
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78679
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Vittorio Romeo from comment #0)
> This code snippet
>
> int main()
> {
> auto a = 6 + ".txt";
> }
>
> does not produce any warning with `-Wall -Wextra -Wpedantic`.
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82028
Bug ID: 82028
Summary: Windows x86_64 should not pass float aggregates in xmm
Product: gcc
Version: 7.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81964
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77492
--- Comment #3 from Danila ---
Update: Clang with libc++ also matches regex in all 3 cases.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35878
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||carl.cook at gmail dot com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82021
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82008
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66256
--- Comment #10 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Right, GCC's behaviour for comment 0, comment 7 and comment 8 is a bug.
GCC's behaviour for comment 3 and comment 4 is not a bug.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80935
--- Comment #3 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Tue Aug 29 19:51:30 2017
New Revision: 251429
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=251429=gcc=rev
Log:
PR c++/80935 - wrong C++17 error with lambda
* decl.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82025
Bug ID: 82025
Summary: ICE: in finish_expr_stmt, at cp/semantics.c:678
Product: gcc
Version: 7.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82021
--- Comment #2 from Carl Cook ---
Thanks Marc, that was it. I'd tried with no std=X flags, and std=c+=11.
Definitely a DUP. I didn't find any related bug reports when skimming through
bugzilla, but that's probably just my fault.
Incidentally,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81021
--- Comment #34 from Matt Godbolt ---
Confirmed this fixes all the issues we were seeing. Thanks!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81902
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80936
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82028
--- Comment #1 from Josh Stone ---
Fedora's mingw-gcc also produces code passing through xmm0:
:
0: 55 push %rbp
1: 48 89 e5mov%rsp,%rbp
4: f2 0f 11 45 10 movsd
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82027
Marc Glisse changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82021
--- Comment #3 from Marc Glisse ---
You can search for "Ville Voutilainen", the patch was this year, not long
before the release so maybe March.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81932
--- Comment #21 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Xi Ruoyao from comment #20)
> (In reply to Martin Sebor from comment #18)
> > GDB already has a C++ parser. It just isn't good enough. It understands
> > that B and B are one and the same
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81857
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |SUSPENDED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81519
--- Comment #7 from Daniel Santos ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #4)
> Ok, so I've briefly investigated source code and providing such information
> is definitely not a simple task :/
>
> I would recommend to fix PR39851 and then
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81932
--- Comment #24 from Xi Ruoyao ---
(In reply to Paul Smith from comment #23)
> The lookup_type() was just to show the problem more clearly: I don't do that
> in my actual Python code. This part (or something similar) is what I use:
>
> class
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82026
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82015
--- Comment #1 from Michael Meissner ---
Author: meissner
Date: Tue Aug 29 20:25:57 2017
New Revision: 251432
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=251432=gcc=rev
Log:
[gcc]
2017-08-29 Michael Meissner
PR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82024
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71500
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||flashmozzg at gmail dot com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82025
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78840
--- Comment #4 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Tue Aug 29 20:21:23 2017
New Revision: 251431
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=251431=gcc=rev
Log:
PR c++/78840 - ICE with const and nested generic lambda
*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82027
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka at ucw dot cz
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81887
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81193
--- Comment #17 from Michael Meissner ---
Author: meissner
Date: Tue Aug 29 21:06:21 2017
New Revision: 251437
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=251437=gcc=rev
Log:
[gcc]
2017-07-13 Michael Meissner
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81926
--- Comment #20 from Dennis Clarke ---
(In reply to r...@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de from comment #17)
> > --- Comment #16 from Dennis Clarke ---
> > This is excellent follow up ...
> > Here is the diff on 7.2.0 gcc/config/sparc/sparc.c based on
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78679
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81385
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81343
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81926
--- Comment #15 from Richard Biener ---
Note that dwarf2out.c causes the section to be emitted via
static void
dwarf2out_assembly_start (void)
{
#ifndef DWARF2_LINENO_DEBUGGING_INFO
ASM_GENERATE_INTERNAL_LABEL (text_section_label,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82018
--- Comment #3 from tkoenig at netcologne dot de
---
Am 29.08.2017 um 10:35 schrieb janus at gcc dot gnu.org:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82018
>
> --- Comment #2 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
> (In reply to janus from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78119
Pawel Sikora changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||7.1.1
Known to fail|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60790
--- Comment #8 from nsz at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 42069
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=42069=edit
execution test main code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81841
--- Comment #3 from dbroemmel ---
I ran 'make check-gfortran' with version 6.2.0 and the added line in parse.c.
Here's the result:
=== gfortran Summary ===
# of expected passes42612
# of expected failures
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81295
--- Comment #19 from Alan Modra ---
> Are you sure other archs do not need similar fiddling?
Yes.
> Given you waited zero days for backporting...
Eh? 5a402d649 (r250974) went in Aug 8. a9b2df6cc2 (r251065) went in Aug 12.
The first one
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81785
--- Comment #4 from Marek Polacek ---
Looks like removing the optimization regresses c-c++-common/restrict-2.c.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82011
--- Comment #3 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #1 from Richard Biener ---
> Ok, so a simple checking patch like the following unfortunately fires
> right and left, restricting it to DW_AT_inline doesn't fire for me on
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82018
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82018
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81968
--- Comment #9 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Tue, 29 Aug 2017, ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81968
>
> --- Comment #8 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE Uni-Bielefeld.DE>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81841
--- Comment #6 from dbroemmel ---
Created attachment 42066
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=42066=edit
summary of make check-gfortran for 8.0.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81841
--- Comment #4 from dbroemmel ---
(In reply to janus from comment #2)
> If OpenMP actually allows this, then it is obviously a regression.
I'm not an OpenMP expert (nor am I too familiar with common blocks). The OpenMP
spec., version 4.5, says
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82003
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39851
--- Comment #7 from Martin Liška ---
Author: marxin
Date: Tue Aug 29 07:46:10 2017
New Revision: 251400
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=251400=gcc=rev
Log:
Fix --help=target (PR other/39851).
2017-08-29 Martin Liska
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81295
--- Comment #12 from Alan Modra ---
Author: amodra
Date: Tue Aug 29 08:22:44 2017
New Revision: 251402
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=251402=gcc=rev
Log:
PR driver/81523: Make -static override -pie
-static and -pie together behave
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81523
--- Comment #5 from Alan Modra ---
Author: amodra
Date: Tue Aug 29 08:22:44 2017
New Revision: 251402
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=251402=gcc=rev
Log:
PR driver/81523: Make -static override -pie
-static and -pie together behave
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81170
--- Comment #2 from Alan Modra ---
Author: amodra
Date: Tue Aug 29 08:22:44 2017
New Revision: 251402
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=251402=gcc=rev
Log:
PR driver/81523: Make -static override -pie
-static and -pie together behave
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81841
--- Comment #7 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to dbroemmel from comment #5)
> 'make check-gfortran' with the latest git version (only gfortran compiled)
> gives:
>
> === gfortran Summary ===
>
> # of expected passes
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82011
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60790
--- Comment #7 from nsz at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 42068
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=42068=edit
execution test library code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81968
--- Comment #8 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #6 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
> On Mon, 28 Aug 2017, ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE wrote:
[...]
> Thanks. Can you check whether the above patch resolves the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60790
nsz at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nsz at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81993
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81170
--- Comment #3 from Alan Modra ---
Author: amodra
Date: Tue Aug 29 08:23:44 2017
New Revision: 251403
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=251403=gcc=rev
Log:
[RS6000] linux startfile/endfile
These need to match the gnu-user.h definitions to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81295
--- Comment #13 from Alan Modra ---
Author: amodra
Date: Tue Aug 29 08:23:44 2017
New Revision: 251403
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=251403=gcc=rev
Log:
[RS6000] linux startfile/endfile
These need to match the gnu-user.h definitions to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81523
--- Comment #6 from Alan Modra ---
Author: amodra
Date: Tue Aug 29 08:25:17 2017
New Revision: 251404
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=251404=gcc=rev
Log:
PR driver/81523: Make -static override -pie
-static and -pie together behave
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81170
--- Comment #4 from Alan Modra ---
Author: amodra
Date: Tue Aug 29 08:25:17 2017
New Revision: 251404
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=251404=gcc=rev
Log:
PR driver/81523: Make -static override -pie
-static and -pie together behave
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81295
--- Comment #14 from Alan Modra ---
Author: amodra
Date: Tue Aug 29 08:25:17 2017
New Revision: 251404
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=251404=gcc=rev
Log:
PR driver/81523: Make -static override -pie
-static and -pie together behave
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82014
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81974
--- Comment #5 from Vittorio Zecca ---
I applied the fix and I confirm it works.
Thank you Thomas for your fast intervention.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82011
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
Ok. I think I left some dead (but not so dead as it appears) code in
gen_subprogram_die. So I am testing (together with the verification)
Index: gcc/dwarf2out.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82018
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tkoenig at netcologne dot de
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81170
Alan Modra changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81295
Alan Modra changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39851
--- Comment #9 from Martin Liška ---
Author: marxin
Date: Tue Aug 29 08:35:46 2017
New Revision: 251406
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=251406=gcc=rev
Log:
Fix --help=target (Ada) (PR other/39851)
2017-08-29 Martin Liska
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82018
--- Comment #2 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to janus from comment #0)
>
> i8 = 2.0
> 1
> Warning: Possible change of value in conversion from REAL(4) to INTEGER(8)
> at (1) [-Wconversion]
Note that if I change 2.0 to 2.1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81805
Tom de Vries changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
Component|libgomp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82018
Bug ID: 82018
Summary: [6/7/8 Regression] missing warnings with -Wconversion
Product: gcc
Version: 6.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81926
--- Comment #13 from Rainer Orth ---
Created attachment 42065
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=42065=edit
proposed patch
The following patch bootstrapped successfully on sparc-sun-solaris2.11 with
as/ld
and the comparison
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81295
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||7.2.1
Target Milestone|7.2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39851
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||8.0
Known to fail|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82004
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Andrey Guskov from comment #2)
> Approximately a hundred different variables and function calls, the majority
> of which are raised to the second or third power, sometimes fourth or fifth.
> As
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82012
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|s390x-linux-gnu |s390x-linux-gnu, nios2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82003
--- Comment #8 from José Pekkarinen ---
Any chance the fix would be backported to gcc 5.4.X?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82016
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Component|target
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82012
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82018
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
Known to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79832
listcrawler at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||listcrawler at gmail dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81170
--- Comment #5 from Alan Modra ---
Author: amodra
Date: Tue Aug 29 08:27:02 2017
New Revision: 251405
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=251405=gcc=rev
Log:
[RS6000] linux startfile/endfile
These need to match the gnu-user.h definitions to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81295
--- Comment #15 from Alan Modra ---
Author: amodra
Date: Tue Aug 29 08:27:02 2017
New Revision: 251405
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=251405=gcc=rev
Log:
[RS6000] linux startfile/endfile
These need to match the gnu-user.h definitions to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81295
Alan Modra changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81298
Bug 81298 depends on bug 81295, which changed state.
Bug 81295 Summary: bootstrap broken on powerpc-linux-gnu with
--enable-default-pie
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81295
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81993
--- Comment #11 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Tue Aug 29 07:06:46 2017
New Revision: 251399
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=251399=gcc=rev
Log:
2017-08-29 Richard Biener
Backport from mainline
1 - 100 of 196 matches
Mail list logo