https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67081
İsmail Dönmez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ismail at i10z dot com
--- Comment #1 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65837
--- Comment #31 from chrbr at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: chrbr
Date: Mon Nov 16 08:46:42 2015
New Revision: 230404
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=230404&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2015-11-16 Christian Bruel
PR target/65837
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68117
--- Comment #26 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Sun, 15 Nov 2015, trippels at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68117
>
> --- Comment #25 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
> I think the issue is caused by Ri
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60336
--- Comment #39 from Andrew Pinski ---
You should also update gimplify.c's zero_sized_type to be the same as your
empty_record_p.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65837
--- Comment #32 from chrbr at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: chrbr
Date: Mon Nov 16 09:00:09 2015
New Revision: 230406
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=230406&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2015-11-16 Christian Bruel
PR target/65837
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68363
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68117
--- Comment #27 from Richard Biener ---
Sth like
Index: gcc/tree-ssa.c
===
--- gcc/tree-ssa.c (revision 230404)
+++ gcc/tree-ssa.c (working copy)
@@ -125,6 +125,14 @@ redi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68117
--- Comment #28 from Joost VandeVondele
---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #27)
> Sth like
>
> Index: gcc/tree-ssa.c
> ===
> --- gcc/tree-ssa.c (revision 230404)
> +
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68117
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66214
--- Comment #24 from Guille ---
Yes, just checked that.
'gcc -g file_that_include_ssl_h.cpp' builds fine, but
'g++ -g file_that_include_ssl_h.cpp' ICEs.
(In reply to Magnus Fromreide from comment #23)
> One more question - you are using the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68369
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
Target|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68368
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |6.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68366
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68367
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68363
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.9.4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68362
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |6.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68328
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68362
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68368
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68367
--- Comment #2 from Christophe Lyon ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1)
> Ok, so I assume this is after the fix for PR68306.
Indeed: that was fixed at r230310, at which point my build still succeded.
It started to fail at r230311.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68360
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
Status|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68362
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||adam at os dot
inf.tu-dresden.de
--- C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68359
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68357
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |6.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68356
--- Comment #1 from Richard Biener ---
It looks like a math library issue. The test has workarounds for glibc:
/* Disabled due to glibc PR 6792, fixed in Apr 2015. */
if (0)
TEST (log1p (d), LARGE_NEG_EDOM);
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65837
--- Comment #33 from chrbr at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: chrbr
Date: Mon Nov 16 10:21:09 2015
New Revision: 230408
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=230408&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2015-11-16 Christian Bruel
PR target/65837
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68335
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|middle-end |tree-optimization
Target Milestone|--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68321
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65752
Jeehoon Kang changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jeehoon.kang at sf dot
snu.ac.kr
--- Com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68341
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |6.0
Summary|FAIL:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68348
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |6.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68349
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |6.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68344
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68237
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |pault at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66762
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |pault at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66145
Daniel Seither changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tiwoc at arcor dot de
--- Comment #6 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68117
--- Comment #30 from Richard Biener ---
Ok, so we already do
void
remove_edge (edge e)
{
if (current_loops != NULL)
rescan_loop_exit (e, false, true);
/* This is probably not needed, but it doesn't hurt. */
/* FIXME: This should be c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68337
Ilya Enkovich changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68328
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #5 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68306
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68367
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Christophe Lyon from comment #2)
> (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1)
> > Ok, so I assume this is after the fix for PR68306.
>
> Indeed: that was fixed at r230310, at which point my b
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68328
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68328
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
In insn 70 actually set eax to edx rather than ebx, I'd suppose it would work
correctly.
Better testcase that fails reliably:
int a, b, c = 1, d = 1, e;
__attribute__((noinline, noclone)) int
foo (void)
{
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65752
--- Comment #44 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Mon, 16 Nov 2015, jeehoon.kang at sf dot snu.ac.kr wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65752
>
> Jeehoon Kang changed:
>
>What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67790
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener ---
Aww. And then I'm running into the issue of pattern recog / reduction analysis
ordering which has caused me headaches before... maybe time to (finally) fix
that.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68372
Bug ID: 68372
Summary: [concepts] invalid use of pack expansion expression in
member function template declaration
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68337
--- Comment #1 from Ilya Enkovich ---
The problem is that memcpy is inlined before instrumentation takes place. This
causes a lot of statements to copy bounds and thus we get a huge function and
significant compilation time.
One possible soluti
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68249
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68189
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #9
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68194
--- Comment #5 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
The different if-conversion behaviour enabled a new cse opportunity
which then produced the RTL that triggered the bad ree behaviour.
The relevant RTL insns before the ree pass look like:
Basic
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65837
--- Comment #34 from chrbr at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: chrbr
Date: Mon Nov 16 11:20:02 2015
New Revision: 230410
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=230410&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2015-11-16 Christian Bruel
PR target/65837
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60336
--- Comment #40 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #38)
> Created attachment 36724 [details]
> An updated patch to add empty_record_p
>
> I am testing it now.
It doesn't work since it misses
for (binfo = TYPE_BINFO (type),
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60336
--- Comment #41 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #39)
> You should also update gimplify.c's zero_sized_type to be the same as your
> empty_record_p.
It won't work since the size of empty class isn't zero in C++. We
just
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68195
--- Comment #6 from Matthias Goldhoorn ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #5)
> Fails with gcc-5-branch, but doesn't fail on trunk for me.
Is there a trunk branch or tag available i can try to compile, the last
versions i tried does n
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68348
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68370
--- Comment #2 from David Malcolm ---
Thanks for reporting this.
That error message:
libgccjit.so: error: gcc_jit_block_add_assignment: mismatching types:
assignment to text (type: const char *) from &text[(int)1] (type: const char *)
looks wr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65837
chrbr at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68157
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66776
--- Comment #2 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Renlin, can you close this PR if there's nothing more to do here?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68365
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65752
--- Comment #45 from Jeehoon Kang ---
> I think this is not true. For example with MatLab (might be sth else,
> if I don't remember correctly) you are required to pass pointers to
> arrays in two halves in double(!) values (I believe the only fu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66145
--- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely ---
I would suggest not using exceptions with iostreams, they've always been an odd
mix anyway.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68306
Ulrich Weigand changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Resolution|FIXED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60993
--- Comment #4 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
With the patch at https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2015-11/msg00093.html,
compiling the test gives the error
pr60993.f90:7:45:
integer, parameter :: infn(2) = [Z'',Z'FFF0']
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67941
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68306
--- Comment #13 from Richard Biener ---
Can you attach preprocessed source? See also PR68367 which I can't reproduce
with a cross.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65752
--- Comment #46 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Mon, 16 Nov 2015, jeehoon.kang at sf dot snu.ac.kr wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65752
>
> --- Comment #45 from Jeehoon Kang ---
> > I think this is not true. For ex
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68321
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
Depends on|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68365
--- Comment #4 from n8tm at aol dot com ---
On 11/16/2015 7:13 AM, rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68365
>
> Richard Biener changed:
>
>What|Removed |Added
> ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67941
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 36727
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=36727&action=edit
gcc6-pr67941.patch
Random attempt to write some condition, but I really have no idea if it is at
least anywhere
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68277
--- Comment #11 from Kazumoto Kojima ---
(In reply to Kazumoto Kojima from comment #10)
> I'll report back when the regression test currently running is done.
I've confirmed that there are no new failures with the new patch on
sh4-unknown-linux-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68327
Ilya Enkovich changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68277
--- Comment #12 from Oleg Endo ---
(In reply to Kazumoto Kojima from comment #10)
> (In reply to Oleg Endo from comment #9)
> > At the current (lack of) pace I don't know when all of that will be done.
> > So my idea was to at least reduce the R
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68367
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67280
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68117
--- Comment #31 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Nov 16 14:06:08 2015
New Revision: 230424
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=230424&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2015-11-16 Richard Biener
PR middle-end/68117
* cf
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67653
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68194
--- Comment #6 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Proposed patch at:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-11/msg01953.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68277
--- Comment #13 from Oleg Endo ---
Author: olegendo
Date: Mon Nov 16 14:11:50 2015
New Revision: 230425
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=230425&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
gcc/
PR target/68277
* config/sh/sh.md (addsi3_scr): Handl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68277
--- Comment #14 from Oleg Endo ---
Author: olegendo
Date: Mon Nov 16 14:22:10 2015
New Revision: 230426
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=230426&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
gcc/
Backport from mainline
2015-11-16 Oleg Endo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68362
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68349
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67280
--- Comment #7 from cbaylis at gcc dot gnu.org ---
I am backporting the fix to GCC 5 now. I'll close it once committed.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68306
--- Comment #14 from Ulrich Weigand ---
Building the following reduced test case with
-O2 -ftree-vectorize -fcx-fortran-rules
with an spu-elf cross-cc1 shows the ICE.
void
test (_Complex float *dest,
_Complex float scale, int count)
{
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66312
--- Comment #23 from Oleg Endo ---
Ping?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68277
Oleg Endo changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65251
--- Comment #7 from Oleg Endo ---
Ping?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68367
--- Comment #5 from Christophe Lyon ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #3)
> (In reply to Christophe Lyon from comment #2)
> > (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1)
> > > Ok, so I assume this is after the fix for PR68306.
> >
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65251
--- Comment #8 from John Paul Adrian Glaubitz ---
(In reply to Oleg Endo from comment #7)
> Ping?
Please wait a few more days. I'm currently trying a new approach with qemu-sh4
as you have probably seen on the debian-superh mailing list.
This w
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68367
--- Comment #6 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Mon, 16 Nov 2015, clyon at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68367
>
> --- Comment #5 from Christophe Lyon ---
> (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68306
--- Comment #16 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Nov 16 15:04:00 2015
New Revision: 230428
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=230428&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2015-11-16 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/68306
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68306
--- Comment #15 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Mon, 16 Nov 2015, uweigand at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68306
>
> --- Comment #14 from Ulrich Weigand ---
> Building the following reduced test ca
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67280
--- Comment #8 from cbaylis at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: cbaylis
Date: Mon Nov 16 15:01:01 2015
New Revision: 230427
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=230427&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
backport of fix for PR67280 (r227407)
2015-11-16 Charles
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67354
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 36728
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=36728&action=edit
gcc6-pr67354.patch
Untested hack that just defers generating mangling aliases if at_eof, until the
fns are put
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67354
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #7
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68306
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67337
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67326
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67326
--- Comment #4 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Mon, 16 Nov 2015, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67326
>
> Jakub Jelinek changed:
>
>What|Removed |Added
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68367
--- Comment #7 from Christophe Lyon ---
(In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #6)
> On Mon, 16 Nov 2015, clyon at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
>
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68367
> >
> > --- Comment #5 from Christophe Lyon
1 - 100 of 148 matches
Mail list logo
