Component: ada
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: lhyatt at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Hello-
I ran into this trying to "make check" all languages, when run as root, the
test_prio.adb test never terminates. After 5 minutes it seems that dejagn
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91853
--- Comment #7 from lhyatt at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: lhyatt
Date: Wed Dec 11 14:52:31 2019
New Revision: 279226
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=279226&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Adds multibyte awareness to pretty-print.c
2019-12-1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93067
lhyatt at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #47547|0 |1
is obsolete
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108244
Lewis Hyatt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67046
Lewis Hyatt changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||lhyatt at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67046
--- Comment #5 from Lewis Hyatt ---
The patch was submitted for review here:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2023-January/609951.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67046
Lewis Hyatt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66290
--- Comment #5 from Lewis Hyatt ---
Patch submitted for review:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2022-July/598989.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66290
--- Comment #7 from Lewis Hyatt ---
The wrong location is fixed for GCC 13. Shall I leave the PR open for now,
since there was also the issue of getting a caret pointing to the name of
macro, rather than just a diagnostic for the whole line? I ca
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66290
--- Comment #8 from Lewis Hyatt ---
(In reply to Lewis Hyatt from comment #7)
> The wrong location is fixed for GCC 13. Shall I leave the PR open for now,
> since there was also the issue of getting a caret pointing to the name of
> macro, rather
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69543
Lewis Hyatt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|WAITING
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91669
Lewis Hyatt changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||lhyatt at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55578
Lewis Hyatt changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||lhyatt at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #9
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91669
Lewis Hyatt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
|--- |FIXED
CC||lhyatt at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2 from Lewis Hyatt ---
This was fixed by r13-2994. Sorry for not tagging this PR, I came upon the
issue via PR69543 comment 9 instead.
Regarding PR90400, I think that is about the way
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24639
Bug 24639 depends on bug 103036, which changed state.
Bug 103036 Summary: incorrect #pragma GCC diagnostic suppression for macro
expansion and -Wuninitialized
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103036
What|Removed
|--- |FIXED
CC||lhyatt at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #5 from Lewis Hyatt ---
For the testcases in comment 2 and comment 4, the problem was the loss of macro
tracking information for the _Pragma token, and r9-1926 (for PR69558) fixed
that
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55578
--- Comment #11 from Lewis Hyatt ---
(In reply to Vadim Zeitlin from comment #10)
> There definitely was a change in behaviour in gcc 11 because I had to make
> this change
>
> https://github.com/wxWidgets/wxWidgets/commit/
> 95c98a0b5ff71caca66
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55578
Lewis Hyatt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60014
Lewis Hyatt changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||lhyatt at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #8
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89549
--- Comment #25 from Lewis Hyatt ---
This patch would make the note controllable via #pragma GCC diagnostic in the
same way as the warning is:
=
diff --git a/gcc/c-family/c-indentation.cc b/gcc/c-family/c-indentation.cc
index 85a3ae1b303..3b
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60014
Lewis Hyatt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85266
Lewis Hyatt changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||lhyatt at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91669
Lewis Hyatt changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||falemagn at gmail dot com
--- Comment #7 f
||lhyatt at gcc dot gnu.org
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
--- Comment #6 from Lewis Hyatt ---
This was the same issue as PR91669. Fixed by r10-325 and a testcase was added
in r13-3051.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 91669 ***
|--- |DUPLICATE
CC||lhyatt at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1 from Lewis Hyatt ---
Same issue as PR97498.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 97498 ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97498
Lewis Hyatt changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||e...@coeus-group.com
--- Comment #12 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53431
--- Comment #47 from Lewis Hyatt ---
(In reply to Manuel López-Ibáñez from comment #46)
> If you don't get much attention to the patch, it may be worth pinging it.
> But before that, I would also suggest submitting all the cleanups separately
> a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53431
Lewis Hyatt changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||lhyatt at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #44
erity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: other
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: lhyatt at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
If the user has a non-UTF-8 locale configured, they will currently still
receive UTF-8 output from GCC's stderr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102099
--- Comment #1 from Lewis Hyatt ---
Created attachment 51365
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51365&action=edit
Tested patch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55971
Lewis Hyatt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107722
Lewis Hyatt changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||lhyatt at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108244
Lewis Hyatt changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||lhyatt at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #6
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108244
--- Comment #7 from Lewis Hyatt ---
The testcases mentioned so far in this PR (the original report, and the
reduction in Comment 5) started failing in r13-1544, because that revision
added #pragma GCC diagnostic to the set of pragmas that are re
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108244
--- Comment #8 from Lewis Hyatt ---
Here is the patch:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2022-December/609275.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53431
--- Comment #49 from Lewis Hyatt ---
I rebased the patches so they apply to the current master branch and pinged
them on gcc-patches here:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2022-May/595556.html
-Lewis
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84920
Lewis Hyatt changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||lhyatt at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #8
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84920
--- Comment #10 from Lewis Hyatt ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #9)
> That looks pretty good to me. What does it produce for the operator<<
> example in comment 1?
With the default options:
=
iowarn2.cpp: In function ‘
||lhyatt at gcc dot gnu.org
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
--- Comment #4 from Lewis Hyatt ---
Dup of PR103902. I'll take a look.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 103902 ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103902
Lewis Hyatt changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||maik.urbannek at cattatech dot
de
--- Co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103902
--- Comment #3 from Lewis Hyatt ---
I can look into that.
|--- |DUPLICATE
CC||lhyatt at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3 from Lewis Hyatt ---
It is indeed a dup of PR53920. Also, I have a patch awaiting review for
PR53431; that fixes all 3.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 53920 ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53920
--- Comment #4 from Lewis Hyatt ---
*** Bug 64698 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53920
Lewis Hyatt changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||lhyatt at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55971
Lewis Hyatt changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||lhyatt at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #8
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103902
--- Comment #4 from Lewis Hyatt ---
(In reply to Lewis Hyatt from comment #3)
> I can look into that.
Patch waiting for review here:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2022-June/596660.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100125
Lewis Hyatt changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||lhyatt at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53431
Lewis Hyatt changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gcc at behdad dot org
--- Comment #50 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53431
Lewis Hyatt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53920
Lewis Hyatt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
||lhyatt at gcc dot gnu.org
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
--- Comment #2 from Lewis Hyatt ---
Same issue as PR53431; fixed by r13-1544
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 53431 ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53431
Lewis Hyatt changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||f.heckenb...@fh-soft.de
--- Comment #53 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97498
Lewis Hyatt changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||lhyatt at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever
||a/show_bug.cgi?id=97498
CC||lhyatt at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #20 from Lewis Hyatt ---
See PR97498 which is closely related to this. It seems that the use of
input_location while handling diagnostic pragmas is
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91733
Lewis Hyatt changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||lhyatt at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91733
--- Comment #6 from Lewis Hyatt ---
The diagnostics issue is fixed now. Do we want to mark this resolved, or keep
it open given the other question regarding support for \r line endings in
general?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83473
Lewis Hyatt changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||lhyatt at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97498
--- Comment #2 from Lewis Hyatt ---
Patch submitted for review here:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2022-July/598116.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97498
Lewis Hyatt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106252
Lewis Hyatt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |lhyatt at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106252
Lewis Hyatt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66290
Lewis Hyatt changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||lhyatt at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66290
--- Comment #4 from Lewis Hyatt ---
OK, I understand now why done_lexing is necessary, plenty of places call back
into libcpp after lexing, e.g. to interpret strings, and this may generate
warnings.
I think that one line patch is the way to go th
: lto
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: lhyatt at gcc dot gnu.org
CC: marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
This is related to PR101551 but easier to demonstrate a testcase for:
===
#define X(p) p == 0
int f(void *) __attribute__
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106274
--- Comment #3 from Lewis Hyatt ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #2)
> I think it's a dup of PR80922.
I think it's a bit different, if I understand correctly, PR80922 is asking for
something much more difficult, it wants the LTO strea
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106274
--- Comment #4 from Lewis Hyatt ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1)
> I'm not sure to what extent this is still required with respect to the
> diagnostic context though - you'd have to try.
Thanks for the explanation, the general n
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93067
Lewis Hyatt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80755
--- Comment #6 from Lewis Hyatt ---
(In reply to Sam James from comment #5)
> Thank you Lewis!
>
> Would you mind pinging this again?
>
> I've just started hitting this on glibc systems too as we added a wrapper to
> a libbsd header (which I'm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80755
Lewis Hyatt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110558
Lewis Hyatt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |14.0
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111918
Lewis Hyatt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |14.0
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114423
Lewis Hyatt changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||lhyatt at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
||2024-03-22
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
CC||lhyatt at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2 from Lewis Hyatt ---
This should fix it correctly, will test it sometime.
diff --git a/libcpp/directives.cc b/libcpp/directives.cc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114436
Lewis Hyatt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
URL|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103902
--- Comment #9 from Lewis Hyatt ---
Thanks, sorry about that, I need to replace "unsigned long" with "size_t". Will
fix it.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87299
Lewis Hyatt changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||lhyatt at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4
||2023-08-25
CC||lhyatt at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
||a/show_bug.cgi?id=103165
|--- |FIXED
CC||lhyatt at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4 from Lewis Hyatt ---
Fixed by r12-4797.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61474
Lewis Hyatt changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||lhyatt at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90400
Lewis Hyatt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
|--- |DUPLICATE
CC||lhyatt at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #6 from Lewis Hyatt ---
Same issue as bug 90400... was resolved as well by r12-5454.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 90400 ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90400
Lewis Hyatt changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||paboyle at ph dot ed.ac.uk
--- Comment #11
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36887
Lewis Hyatt changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||lhyatt at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4
|1
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
CC||lhyatt at gcc dot gnu.org
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
||a/show_bug.cgi?id=90400
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105608
--- Comment #2 from Lewis Hyatt ---
When a PCH file is restored, the global line_maps instance is replaced with the
one that was stored in the PCH file. Hence any locations that were generated
prior to restoring the PCH file need to be added bac
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115312
Lewis Hyatt changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||lhyatt at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89038
Lewis Hyatt changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||lhyatt at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82335
Lewis Hyatt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89038
Lewis Hyatt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36887
Lewis Hyatt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87299
Lewis Hyatt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108244
Lewis Hyatt changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jpewhacker at gmail dot com
--- Comment #
|--- |DUPLICATE
CC||lhyatt at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2 from Lewis Hyatt ---
This issue eventually got dealt with when it came up again in PR 108244. The
testcase c-c++-common/gomp/pr108244-3.c covers this one.
*** This bug has been
||a/show_bug.cgi?id=108244
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|--- |FIXED
CC||lhyatt at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #5 from Lewis Hyatt ---
This got fixed
||a/show_bug.cgi?id=103165
CC||lhyatt at gcc dot gnu.org
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
--- Comment #3 from Lewis Hyatt ---
It'
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91517
Lewis Hyatt changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||duparq at free dot fr
--- Comment #7 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112319
Lewis Hyatt changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||lhyatt at gcc dot gnu.org
Last
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112319
--- Comment #2 from Lewis Hyatt ---
Patch sent for review:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2023-November/634931.html
|enhancement
Last reconfirmed|2015-08-23 00:00:00 |2023-11-7
CC||lhyatt at gcc dot gnu.org
URL||https://gcc.gnu.org/piperma
||il/gcc-patches
1 - 100 of 152 matches
Mail list logo
