On Mon, 28 Apr 2014, Cary Coutant wrote:
What are the rules for backporting to 4.9.1? Should I backport this patch?
As it fixes a regression, yes. If you think it is safe to do so.
Richard.
-cary
2014-04-25 Cary Coutant ccout...@google.com
gcc/
PR debug/60929
What are the rules for backporting to 4.9.1? Should I backport this patch?
-cary
2014-04-25 Cary Coutant ccout...@google.com
gcc/
PR debug/60929
* dwarf2out.c (should_move_die_to_comdat): A type definition
can contain a subprogram definition, but don't move it to
I've backported the following patch from trunk at r209812. Committed
on the google/gcc-4_9 branch at r209875.
Google ref: 14230806.
-cary
gcc/
* dwarf2out.c (should_move_die_to_comdat): A type definition
can contain a subprogram definition, but don't move it to a
comdat
Fix a few ICEs and other problems with -fdebug-types-sections.
This is a followup to an earlier proposed patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2012-08/msg01998.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2012-09/msg0.html
(1) If a function contains a local typedef of an anonymous
