http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53470
--- Comment #3 from vincenzo Innocente
2012-05-25 06:59:33 UTC ---
same problem with BDF
cp /build/vin/binutils/build/gold/ld-new
/afs/cern.ch/user/i/innocent/w3/gcc47slc5/bin/ld
[vocms123] /build/vin/newb/CMSSW_6_0_X_2012-05-14-1400 $ c++ -g -f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53482
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53358
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ncahill_alt at yahoo dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53470
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||markus at trippelsdorf dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53459
--- Comment #5 from dodji at seketeli dot org
2012-05-25 08:37:05 UTC ---
> The typedef has been there as kind of static assertion.
> IMHO it would be better to replace it with
> extern char check_count[(N == 2 || N == 4) * 2 - 1];
> or something
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53463
Dodji Seketeli changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53473
--- Comment #2 from Matthias Kretz 2012-05-25 08:53:36
UTC ---
Does the standard allow exceptions in constexpr? A throw is not exactly a
return statement, but according to the rule "constexpr function shall satisfy
[...] exactly one return statem
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53473
--- Comment #3 from Daniel Krügler
2012-05-25 09:07:20 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> Does the standard allow exceptions in constexpr? A throw is not exactly a
> return statement, but according to the rule "constexpr function shall satisfy
>
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52362
--- Comment #9 from Eric Botcazou 2012-05-25
09:24:12 UTC ---
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Fri May 25 09:24:08 2012
New Revision: 187874
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=187874
Log:
PR ada/52362
* config.gcc (i[34567]86-*
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53473
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely 2012-05-25
09:44:45 UTC ---
Yes, odd indeed.
Oddly, Clang barfs on the testcase with a similar error:
t.cc:6:34: error: conflicting types for 'foo'
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53463
--- Comment #3 from Dodji Seketeli 2012-05-25
09:58:42 UTC ---
It seems to me that this issue is dealt with by the patch I have proposed at
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2012-05/msg01389.html. The discussion on
that patch is still going on.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52362
--- Comment #10 from Eric Botcazou 2012-05-25
10:07:27 UTC ---
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Fri May 25 10:07:23 2012
New Revision: 187877
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=187877
Log:
PR ada/52362
* config.gcc (i[34567]86-
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52362
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52725
Steffen Möller changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||steffen_moeller at gmx dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52725
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|error: capture of |error: "capture of
|n
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53474
--- Comment #2 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE 2012-05-25 11:30:08 UTC ---
Sure: a i386-pc-solaris2.10 bootstrap completed with this patch without
issues.
Thanks.
Rainer
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53472
--- Comment #2 from hjl at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-05-25
11:47:08 UTC ---
Author: hjl
Date: Fri May 25 11:47:05 2012
New Revision: 187879
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=187879
Log:
Remove any .comment sections if the first cm
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53470
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53472
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53469
Dodji Seketeli changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53453
--- Comment #13 from Jack Howarth 2012-05-25
12:53:17 UTC ---
Regression test results on x86_64-apple-darwin12 are at
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2012-05/msg02331.html. Note that the
remaining cfstring failures are PR53283.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53435
--- Comment #4 from Kirill Yukhin 2012-05-25
13:03:21 UTC ---
Author: kyukhin
Date: Fri May 25 13:03:18 2012
New Revision: 187881
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=187881
Log:
2012-05-21 Alexander Ivchenko
PR targe
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53398
Kai Tietz changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ktietz at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4 from
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53435
--- Comment #5 from Kirill Yukhin 2012-05-25
13:34:12 UTC ---
Author: kyukhin
Date: Fri May 25 13:34:07 2012
New Revision: 187882
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=187882
Log:
2012-05-25 Alexander Ivchenko
PR targ
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53453
--- Comment #14 from Jack Howarth 2012-05-25
13:38:12 UTC ---
Revised patch with Jakub's documentation correction posted at
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2012-05/msg01710.html.
c-trunk/src/build/backends
--with-mpc=/home/user/gcc-trunk/src/build/backends
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.8.0 20120525 (experimental) (GCC)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52952
--- Comment #12 from Manuel López-Ibáñez 2012-05-25
14:09:00 UTC ---
>
> Basically, the current encoding of the map requires that a new location
> encoding in a map must always be the last location of that map. You
> cannot insert a location in
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52952
--- Comment #13 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-05-25
14:17:41 UTC ---
I guess the C/C++ FEs could for non-trivial string literals put into a hash
table mapping from locus_t (of ADDR_EXPR around STRING_CST) to the first cpp
token for that string, then th
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53484
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Known to work|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53474
--- Comment #3 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-05-25 15:07:09 UTC ---
Author: uros
Date: Fri May 25 15:07:02 2012
New Revision: 187885
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=187885
Log:
PR target/53474
* config/i386/i386.c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53485
Bug #: 53485
Summary: gcc -O -mavx generates illegal instruction on win64
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.3
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53474
Uros Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
URL|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53438
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #13
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53438
--- Comment #14 from William J. Schmidt
2012-05-25 15:37:27 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #13)
> It didn't work because you've used the patch as svn commit message instead of
> ChangeLog entry.
Whoops, found a new kind of mistake to make. :)
> A
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53485
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hjl.tools at gmail dot com
--- Comment #1 from
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53486
Bug #: 53486
Summary: ICE compiling code using lambdas as default argument
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53487
Bug #: 53487
Summary: [4.8 Regression] Unrecognizable insn for conditional
move
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53487
William J. Schmidt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Target Milestone
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53488
Bug #: 53488
Summary: Incorrect code generated when capturing a constant by
reference in a lambda
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: U
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53489
Bug #: 53489
Summary: suggest a feature for gcc.
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53487
--- Comment #1 from William J. Schmidt 2012-05-25
16:09:43 UTC ---
Dumps show that the ICE occurs in the first pass following expand.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53487
William J. Schmidt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #27496|0 |1
is obsolete|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53488
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Status|UNCONFIRM
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53486
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53489
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53008
--- Comment #10 from Aldy Hernandez 2012-05-25
17:14:31 UTC ---
Author: aldyh
Date: Fri May 25 17:14:25 2012
New Revision: 187887
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=187887
Log:
PR middle-end/53008
* trans-mem.c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53441
--- Comment #3 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-05-25 17:29:38 UTC ---
Author: uros
Date: Fri May 25 17:29:33 2012
New Revision: 187888
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=187888
Log:
PR obj-c++/53441
* decl.c (grokdecla
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53441
Uros Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
URL|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53487
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|rtl-optimization|target
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53488
--- Comment #2 from Jiří Paleček 2012-05-25 17:54:00
UTC ---
The bug occurs with these compiler versions:
jirka@debian:~/benchmark$ g++-4.7 -v
Using built-in specs.
COLLECT_GCC=g++-4.7
COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/usr/lib/gcc/i486-linux-gnu/4.7/lto-wrap
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53486
--- Comment #2 from Jiří Paleček 2012-05-25 17:55:39
UTC ---
Sorry for the missing test file, it was somehow lost in the bug submission
process. The compiler version is
jirka@debian:~/benchmark$
LD_LIBRARY_PATH=/usr/lib/gcc-snapshot/lib:$LD_LIBR
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53486
--- Comment #3 from Jiří Paleček 2012-05-25 17:58:50
UTC ---
Created attachment 27499
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=27499
Compressed source file
Sorry again, the file was too big.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53490
Bug #: 53490
Summary: Segmentation Fault when accessing std::set
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: blocker
Priori
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53486
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |UNCONFIRMED
Ever Confirmed|1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53490
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|blocker |normal
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wak
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53490
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely 2012-05-25
18:22:16 UTC ---
I only tried briefly but couldn't reproduce a crash with boost 1.47, will try
later with boost 1.49
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53373
Bernd Schmidt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53486
--- Comment #5 from Jiří Paleček 2012-05-25 18:29:19
UTC ---
If I got a minimal testcase, but a slightly different error message, what
should I do?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53411
--- Comment #4 from Bernd Schmidt 2012-05-25
18:32:40 UTC ---
Looks like an earlier dce pass (during .ce2) leaves a dead insn lying around.
Bug in DCE?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53491
Bug #: 53491
Summary: internal compiler error: in
build_target_expr_with_type, at cp/tree.c:587
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCON
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53321
--- Comment #7 from Uros Bizjak 2012-05-25 20:03:51
UTC ---
Created attachment 27500
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=27500
Preprocessed source
This preprocessed source from the bootstrap fails with -g -O2
-fprofile-generate:
||2012-05-25
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #8 from Uros Bizjak 2012-05-25 20:05:57
UTC ---
Confirmed on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu with:
Target: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
gcc version 4.8.0 20120525 (experimental) [trunk revision 187887] (GCC)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53488
Daniel Krügler changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||daniel.kruegler at
|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53321
--- Comment #9 from Uros Bizjak 2012-05-25 20:10:54
UTC ---
(gdb) bt
#0 internal_error (gmsgid=0x1214dd8 "vector %s %s domain error, in %s at
%s:%u") at ../../gcc-svn/trunk/gcc/diagnostic.c:951
#1 0x00ef31a9 in vec_assert_fail (op=0x11d
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52178
--- Comment #25 from Eric Botcazou 2012-05-25
20:26:20 UTC ---
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Fri May 25 20:26:11 2012
New Revision: 187892
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=187892
Log:
PR lto/52178
* tree-inline.c (remap_gi
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52178
--- Comment #26 from Eric Botcazou 2012-05-25
20:28:13 UTC ---
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Fri May 25 20:28:10 2012
New Revision: 187893
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=187893
Log:
PR lto/52178
* tree-inline.c (remap_gi
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53490
Daniel Krügler changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||daniel.kruegler at
|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53491
Daniel Krügler changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||daniel.kruegler at
|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53490
--- Comment #4 from Jamie Allsop 2012-05-25
22:04:13 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> (Blocker means it blocks a GCC release, so changing priority.)
>
> Is the progam_options library built with -std=c++11 ?
Thanks for fixing the priority. It
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53490
--- Comment #5 from Jamie Allsop 2012-05-25
22:16:41 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> I only tried briefly but couldn't reproduce a crash with boost 1.47, will try
> later with boost 1.49
For clarity I should say I just tried with a vanilla bu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53491
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53492
Bug #: 53492
Summary: [g++ (Ubuntu/Linaro 4.6.1-9ubuntu3) 4.6.1 ] internal
compiler error: in retrieve_specialization, at
cp/pt.c:985
Classification: Unclassified
Produc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53491
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-invalid-code
Summary|in
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32054
--- Comment #2 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-05-25 23:40:17 UTC ---
Author: paolo
Date: Fri May 25 23:40:10 2012
New Revision: 187902
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=187902
Log:
/cp
2012-05-25 Paolo Carlini
PR
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32054
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
CC|gcc-bugs at g
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53490
--- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely 2012-05-26
00:02:13 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> It was a vanilla bjam build of boost 1.49, so
> no -std=c++11.
Then technically that's not supported, since there are no guarantees of
link-compatibility
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53491
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|unassigned at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53493
Bug #: 53493
Summary: [4.7 regression] Compiling with -Os excludes PROGMEM
array from generated object file
(__attribute__((__progmem__)))
Classification: Unclassified
P
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53463
--- Comment #4 from Hans-Peter Nilsson 2012-05-26
01:50:09 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> Could you please try that patch and reply to the discussion there to say if it
> address the issue on your target?
It does thanks, see the reply.
79 matches
Mail list logo
