Bug#67206: [Bug optimization/9363] unused struct literal constants remain

2003-07-09 Thread dhazeghi at yahoo dot com
PLEASE REPLY TO [EMAIL PROTECTED] ONLY, *NOT* [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9363 dhazeghi at yahoo dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Keyw

Bug#169862: [Bug optimization/1823] -ftrapv aborts with pointer difference due to division optimization

2003-07-09 Thread dhazeghi at yahoo dot com
PLEASE REPLY TO [EMAIL PROTECTED] ONLY, *NOT* [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1823 dhazeghi at yahoo dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Keyw

Bug#198042: template keyword workaround for broken parser (undef function) doesn't work

2003-07-09 Thread Wolfgang Bangerth
On Wednesday 09 July 2003 07:20 pm, Daniel Stone wrote: > Hi guys, > When I try the "p->template Release ();" workaround suggested in > http://bugs.debian.org/198042 (from http://bugs.gcc.org/PR11444), I get > ../include/ccom.h: In destructor `CPtr::~CPtr()': > ../include/ccom.h:74: error: syntax e

Bug#198042: template keyword workaround for broken parser (undef function) doesn't work

2003-07-09 Thread Daniel Stone
Hi guys, When I try the "p->template Release ();" workaround suggested in http://bugs.debian.org/198042 (from http://bugs.gcc.org/PR11444), I get ../include/ccom.h: In destructor `CPtr::~CPtr()': ../include/ccom.h:74: error: syntax error before `;' token I'm using the latest Debian gcc3.3, which i

Bug#166940: [Bug target/10984] x86/sse2 ICEs on vector intrinsics with constant argument

2003-07-09 Thread dhazeghi at yahoo dot com
PLEASE REPLY TO [EMAIL PROTECTED] ONLY, *NOT* [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10984 dhazeghi at yahoo dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Key

[Bug target/11442] [3.3 regression] [arm] invalid assembler on arm

2003-07-09 Thread dhazeghi at yahoo dot com
PLEASE REPLY TO [EMAIL PROTECTED] ONLY, *NOT* [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11442 dhazeghi at yahoo dot com changed: What|Removed |Added S

[Bug c++/11437] ICE in lookup_name_real

2003-07-09 Thread neroden at gcc dot gnu dot org
PLEASE REPLY TO [EMAIL PROTECTED] ONLY, *NOT* [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11437 --- Additional Comments From neroden at gcc dot gnu dot org 2003-07-09 22:01 --- Created an attachment (id=4374) --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=4374&a

Bug#200670: Acknowledgement (gcc-2.95: should specify real package providing "awk" in Build-Depends)

2003-07-09 Thread Branden Robinson
libncurses-dev is also a pure virtual package. I recommend: libncurses5-dev | libncurses-dev -- Branden Robinson | GPG signed/encrypted mail welcome [EMAIL PROTECTED] | 1024D/9C0BCBFB Progeny Linux Systems | D5F6 D4C9 E25B 3D37 068C | 72E8 0F42 191A 9

Bug#200670: Acknowledgement (gcc-2.95: should specify real package providing "awk" in Build-Depends)

2003-07-09 Thread Branden Robinson
Come to think of it, does gcc-2.95 need to depend on an Essential package at all? awk is in the weird position of being a virtual Essential package, thanks to mawk. If gawk specifically is needed, then gawk is what should B-Ded on. -- Branden Robinson | GPG signed/encrypted mail welcom

Bug#200670: gcc-2.95: should specify real package providing "awk" in Build-Depends

2003-07-09 Thread Branden Robinson
Package: gcc-2.95 Version: 1:2.95.4-17 Severity: normal gcc-2.95 should not Build-Depend on a pure virtual package. I suggest changing the current build-dep on "awk" to "gawk | awk". -- System Information: Debian Release: testing/unstable Architecture: i386 Kernel: Linux zuul.progeny.com 2.4.20-

Bug#200619: gcc: parisc: compiling dietlibc-dev with -Os causes segfault

2003-07-09 Thread Gerrit Pape
Package: gcc This applies to gcc_3.2.3-6 and gcc_3.3.1-0pre0 on hppa; gcc_3.0.4-16 doesn't have this problem. The dietlibc_0.22-2 builds with -Os by default on hppa, and this test program linked against the dietlibc dies with a segfault after fopen(): #include int main() { FILE *f; fopen("f

[Bug optimization/11366] [3.3 regression] miscompiles XDM-AUTHORIZATION-1 key generation and/or validation in XFree86 at -O2

2003-07-09 Thread doko at cs dot tu-berlin dot de
PLEASE REPLY TO [EMAIL PROTECTED] ONLY, *NOT* [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11366 --- Additional Comments From doko at cs dot tu-berlin dot de 2003-07-09 07:31 --- Subject: Re: [3.3 regression] miscompiles XDM-AUTHORIZATION-1 key generation and/or val

[Bug c/11459] -ansi -std=c99 -pedantic warns about C90's non long-long support when in C99 mode

2003-07-09 Thread neroden at gcc dot gnu dot org
PLEASE REPLY TO [EMAIL PROTECTED] ONLY, *NOT* [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11459 neroden at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug c/11459] -stdc=c99 -pedantic -ansi warns about C90's non long-long support when in C99 mode

2003-07-09 Thread neroden at gcc dot gnu dot org
PLEASE REPLY TO [EMAIL PROTECTED] ONLY, *NOT* [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11459 neroden at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug c++/11437] ICE in lookup_name_real

2003-07-09 Thread neroden at gcc dot gnu dot org
PLEASE REPLY TO [EMAIL PROTECTED] ONLY, *NOT* [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11437 neroden at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug c++/11437] ICE in lookup_name_real

2003-07-09 Thread neroden at gcc dot gnu dot org
PLEASE REPLY TO [EMAIL PROTECTED] ONLY, *NOT* [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11437 --- Additional Comments From neroden at gcc dot gnu dot org 2003-07-09 05:51 --- OK. I now understand things better, and see that __imag is supposed to be an operator, w

[Bug c/11459] -stdc=c99 -pedantic -ansi warns about C90's non long-long support when in C99 mode

2003-07-09 Thread neil at daikokuya dot co dot uk
PLEASE REPLY TO [EMAIL PROTECTED] ONLY, *NOT* [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11459 --- Additional Comments From neil at daikokuya dot co dot uk 2003-07-09 05:45 --- Subject: Re: -stdc=c90 -pedantic -ansi warns about C90's non long-long support when in