PLEASE REPLY TO [EMAIL PROTECTED] ONLY, *NOT* [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11350
pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attach
PLEASE REPLY TO [EMAIL PROTECTED] ONLY, *NOT* [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11437
--- Additional Comments From bangerth at dealii dot org 2003-07-04 21:54
---
I forgot to say: I don't know whether the code is legal, but
it shouldn't ICE anyway, in parti
PLEASE REPLY TO [EMAIL PROTECTED] ONLY, *NOT* [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11437
bangerth at dealii dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> # submitted Debian report #200011 to gcc-gnats as PR 11437
> # http://gcc.gnu.org/PR11437
> forwarded 200011 http://gcc.gnu.org/PR11437
Bug#200011: g++/g++-3.0 segfaults when mixing __complex__-syntax and
std::complex by mistake
Noted your statement th
Your message dated Fri, 4 Jul 2003 22:33:01 +0200
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line Bug#199361: cpp-3.3: cpp0 not installed in
/usr/lib/gcc-lib/*/3.3
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this
On Fri, Jul 04, 2003 at 10:18:50PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
> Andrew Suffield writes:
> > Package: cpp
> > Severity: serious
> > The manpages fsf-funding(7), gpl(7), and gfdl(7) are included in the
> > cpp package. These are clearly non-free (non-modifiable).
> this doesn't make sense. you ar
On Fri, Jul 04, 2003 at 10:18:50PM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
> AFAIK the distribution of
> license texts is allowed in main, even if the license itself is
> non-free.
This would seem to be only common sense.
If I take it upon myself to educate the world about the evil and stupidity
of the EULA
wilson at tuliptree dot org writes:
> The resulting patch works for this testcase. I suspect we will get
> better PIC FP code also, since we aren't needlessly forcing non-XFmode
> constants into memory. This gives a medium size patch that will need a
> lot of testing, and may not be appropriate f
PLEASE REPLY TO [EMAIL PROTECTED] ONLY, *NOT* [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9812
--- Additional Comments From doko at cs dot tu-berlin dot de 2003-07-04
20:30 ---
Subject: Re: Bug#177840: [3.3/3.4 regression] [m68k] ICE in extract_insn, at
recog.c:214
Andrew Suffield writes:
> Package: cpp
> Severity: serious
>
> The manpages fsf-funding(7), gpl(7), and gfdl(7) are included in the
> cpp package. These are clearly non-free (non-modifiable).
this doesn't make sense. you are not allowed to change a copyright,
even for software distributed in main
> > > The fontconfig segfault happens with any of the 2.1.92-2, 2.2.0-2 or
> > > 2.2.0-5 versions of fontconfig/libfontconfig on kullervo.
> >
> > Ok, that would at first glance appear to void my hypothesis; however,
> > fontconfig uses freetype, and that could have been miscompiled. Can you
>
> I
Whoops, compiled the wrong file. Test case:
void f (void)
{
struct { } a;
__imag__ a;
}
Only occurs with g++, not gcc.
--
Falk
Hi,
I can confirm this. It's still there in gcc 3.4 20030629. Test case:
void f (int a)
{
__imag__ a;
}
--
Falk
On Friday 04 July 2003 13:29, Michael Weitzel wrote:
> Description:
> g++/gcc (Version: 1:3.0.4-7, 2:2.95.4-14 and possibly others) crashes
> with segmentation-fault when compiling this:
Still applies to 3:3.3-1
-- vbi
--
One good turn usually gets most of the blanket.
pgpKptSM0On7o.pgp
Descr
PLEASE REPLY TO [EMAIL PROTECTED] ONLY, *NOT* [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11366
--- Additional Comments From reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org 2003-07-04
11:38 ---
Might be related to PR 11198.
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
Yo
Package: g++-3.0
Version: 1:3.0.4-7
Description:
g++/gcc (Version: 1:3.0.4-7, 2:2.95.4-14 and possibly others) crashes
with segmentation-fault when compiling this:
===bang.cc===
#include
int main(int argc, char *argv[])
{
std::complex a(1.0, 1.0);
std::complex b(1.0, 1.0);
Package: cpp
Severity: serious
The manpages fsf-funding(7), gpl(7), and gfdl(7) are included in the
cpp package. These are clearly non-free (non-modifiable). [Plus they
aren't mentioned in the copyright file, which claims the package is
GPLed]
They should almost certainly be removed entirely, and
>Submitter-Id: net
>Originator:Nicolas Burrus
>Organization: LRDE
>Confidential: no
>Synopsis: static_cast behavior with subclasses when default constructor
>available
>Severity: serious
>Priority: medium
>Category: c++
>Class: rejects-legal
>Release: 3.3.
18 matches
Mail list logo
