Re: build error in libgcc

2013-06-25 Thread Chung-Ju Wu 
2013/6/22 Ian Lance Taylor :
> On Sat, Jun 22, 2013 at 12:17 AM, Chung-Ju Wu  wrote:
>> Like this?
>>
>> ===
>> --- libgcc/Makefile.in  (revision 200306)
>> +++ libgcc/Makefile.in  (working copy)
>> @@ -121,8 +121,8 @@
>>  .PHONY: all clean
>>
>>  clean:
>> -   -rm -f auto-target.h libgcc_tm.h libgcc.map
>> -   -rm -f libgcc_tm.stamp stamp-h stmp-ldirs
>> +   -rm -f libgcc_tm.h libgcc.map
>> +   -rm -f libgcc_tm.stamp stmp-ldirs
>> -rm -f *$(objext)
>> -rm -f *.dep
>> -rm -f *.a
>> @@ -131,6 +131,8 @@
>> @$(MULTICLEAN) multi-clean DO=clean
>>  distclean: clean
>> @$(MULTICLEAN) multi-clean DO=distclean
>> +   -rm -f auto-target.h
>> +   -rm -f stamp-h
>> -rm -f *~ Makefile config.cache config.status multilib.out
>> -rm -f config.log
>>  maintainer-clean realclean: distclean
>>
>>
>> Hi, Mike, would you try this revised one? :)
>
> This patch is OK with a ChangeLog entry.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Ian

Thanks for the review and approval.

The patch and a ChangeLog has been posted on:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-06/msg01420.html


Best regards,
jasonwucj

this code in fold-const.c:fold_single_bit_test looks wrong to me

2013-06-25 Thread Kenneth Zadeck 

   if (TREE_CODE (inner) == RSHIFT_EXPR
  && TREE_CODE (TREE_OPERAND (inner, 1)) == INTEGER_CST
  && TREE_INT_CST_HIGH (TREE_OPERAND (inner, 1)) == 0
  && bitnum < TYPE_PRECISION (type)
  && 0 > compare_tree_int (TREE_OPERAND (inner, 1),
   bitnum - TYPE_PRECISION (type)))
{
  bitnum += TREE_INT_CST_LOW (TREE_OPERAND (inner, 1));
  inner = TREE_OPERAND (inner, 0);
}


in particular, in the last stanza of the test
TREE_OPERAND (inner, 1) is a positive number from the second stanza.
bitnum is also always positive and less than the TYPE_PRECISION (type) 
from the third stanza,

so bitnum - TYPE_PRECISION (type) is always negative,

so the compare will always be positive, so this code will never be executed.

it is hard to believe that this is what you want.

kenny

Re: GCC 4.6 missing plugin headers

2013-06-25 Thread Ryan Hill 
On Wed, 19 Jun 2013 10:47:09 +0100
"Alex Leach"  wrote:

> Are there any further releases planned for the 4.6 branch? Would a patch  
> be accepted for this? I've got the 4.6 branch checked out in git, but  
> don't know exactly where an edit would be needed.. Are there any reasons  
> why this header is not installed with 4.6?

http://sources.gentoo.org/cgi-bin/viewvc.cgi/gentoo/src/patchsets/gcc/4.6.4/gentoo/76_all_4.7.0_c-family-headers.patch?revision=1.1&view=markup


-- 
Ryan Hillpsn: dirtyepic_sk
   gcc-porting/toolchain/wxwidgets @ gentoo.org

47C3 6D62 4864 0E49 8E9E  7F92 ED38 BD49 957A 8463


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature