--- Comment #2 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2008-04-22 06:54 ---
Fixed in 4.3.0.
--
ubizjak at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED
--- Comment #1 from uros at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-22 06:49 ---
Subject: Bug 31486
Author: uros
Date: Tue Apr 22 06:48:48 2008
New Revision: 134549
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=134549
Log:
PR target/31486
* gcc.target/i386/pr31486.c: New te
--- Comment #9 from aoliva at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-22 06:28 ---
Created an attachment (id=15507)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=15507&action=view)
Patch that fixes the bug, under test
Here's a patch that I've come up with that fixes this bug. I've just start
--- Comment #8 from aoliva at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-22 06:27 ---
Mine
--
aoliva at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at
--- Comment #55 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2008-04-22 06:27 ---
Subject: Re: [4.3/4.4 Regression]: Combined gcc + binutils
source tree doesn't bootstrap with --enable-shared
>> (BTW, were you libtool maintainers aware of this race/these races?)
>
> I wasn't. But I don't think we g
--- Comment #54 from Ralf dot Wildenhues at gmx dot de 2008-04-22 05:27
---
Subject: Re: [4.3/4.4 Regression]: Combined gcc +
binutils source tree doesn't bootstrap with --enable-shared
* bonzini at gnu dot org wrote on Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 04:39:20PM CEST:
> For win32 it suff
--- Comment #1 from hp at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-22 03:48 ---
Created an attachment (id=15506)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=15506&action=view)
compile with cc1 -fpreprocessed dp-bit.i -O2
Preprocessed dp-bit.c
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?
Build worked with revision 134517. Build was broken with 134530 on, as
follows:
/tmp/hpautotest-gcc1/cris-elf/gccobj/./gcc/xgcc
-B/tmp/hpautotest-gcc1/cris-elf/gccobj/./gcc/ -nostdinc
-B/tmp/hpautotest-gcc1/cris-elf/gccobj/cris-elf/newlib/ -isystem
/tmp/hpautotest-gcc1/cris-elf/gccobj/cris-elf/new
--- Comment #1 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-22 01:19
---
Confirmed. Works for me on 4.2.4, Fails on 4.3.1
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #5 from joel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-21 22:39 ---
Tested against this GCC using gcc-ada-hwint-20080421.diff and patch in
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2008-04/msg01581.html
sparc-rtems4.9-gcc (GCC) 4.4.0 20080421 (experimental) [trunk revision 134514
--- Comment #4 from joel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-21 22:37 ---
Created an attachment (id=15505)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=15505&action=view)
Updated to 4.4.0 20080421 (experimental) [trunk revision 134514]
Requires patch in http://gcc.gnu.org
Consider the following invalid code:
template void f() { T::bla; }
void g() { f(); }
g++ emits:
t.cpp: In function âvoid f() [with T = void ()()]â:
t.cpp:2: instantiated from here
t.cpp:1: error: âblaâ is not a member of âvoid ()()â
The error should say "void ()", not "
A rebuild after changing some files in an up to date tree
shows that $(GNATMAKE) is not properly defined if make is
started from gcc/ instead of the top level:
$ cd gcc && make
C -nostdinc -I- -I. -Iada -I../../gcc/gcc/ada -o ada/b_gnatb.c ada/gnatbind.ali
make: C: Command not found
make: [ada/b_g
--- Comment #4 from sjhowe at dial dot pipex dot com 2008-04-21 18:51
---
Yes. You want a partition that is O(1) that each time round eliminates N/2
elements (bearing in mind the post-condition for nth_element where iterators
greater than the kth iterator have elements that are >= the k
--- Comment #1 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2008-04-21 18:46 ---
This works with 4.3.0 and mainline.
--
ubizjak at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #9 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2008-04-21 18:43 ---
This is fixed in mainline (and probably for 4.3.0 too).
--
ubizjak at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #8 from uros at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-21 18:41 ---
Subject: Bug 26445
Author: uros
Date: Mon Apr 21 18:41:04 2008
New Revision: 134522
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=134522
Log:
PR target/26445
* g++.dg/other/i386-4.C: New test.
--- Comment #2 from jason at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-21 18:03 ---
Subject: Bug 35325
Author: jason
Date: Mon Apr 21 18:02:26 2008
New Revision: 134520
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=134520
Log:
PR c++/35325
* tree.c (cp_tree_equal): Handle FIX
--- Comment #4 from jason at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-21 18:03 ---
Subject: Bug 35678
Author: jason
Date: Mon Apr 21 18:02:26 2008
New Revision: 134520
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=134520
Log:
PR c++/35325
* tree.c (cp_tree_equal): Handle FIX
--- Comment #1 from jason at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-21 17:59 ---
Subject: Bug 35325
Author: jason
Date: Mon Apr 21 17:58:53 2008
New Revision: 134519
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=134519
Log:
PR c++/35325
* tree.c (cp_tree_equal): Handle FIX
On Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 5:56 AM, Snehalatha Rao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On including the header file stdlib.h the problem gets solved. What
> difference in header files between the two versions of the compiler is
> causing this problem? Is this a defect? Is there any workaound to this
> pr
--- Comment #9 from dfranke at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-21 17:12 ---
See comment #8.
--
dfranke at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|
--- Comment #8 from dfranke at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-21 17:11 ---
Fixed on trunk. Closing.
Again.
--
dfranke at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
T
--- Comment #7 from dfranke at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-21 17:11 ---
Subject: Bug 35019
Author: dfranke
Date: Mon Apr 21 17:10:15 2008
New Revision: 134518
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=134518
Log:
gcc:
2008-04-21 Daniel Franke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Comment #53 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2008-04-21 17:02 ---
Subject: Re: [4.3/4.4 Regression]: Combined gcc + binutils
source tree doesn't bootstrap with --enable-shared
> I can extend my patch to as.
You surely can (and actually extend it to everything else that is
invoked vi
--- Comment #52 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2008-04-21 16:40
---
(In reply to comment #51)
> Subject: Re: [4.3/4.4 Regression]: Combined gcc + binutils
> source tree doesn't bootstrap with --enable-shared
>
> > 3. as calls ld to relink itself.
> >3.1 ld calls the previous
--- Comment #51 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2008-04-21 16:25 ---
Subject: Re: [4.3/4.4 Regression]: Combined gcc + binutils
source tree doesn't bootstrap with --enable-shared
> 3. as calls ld to relink itself.
>3.1 ld calls the previous linker to relink itself to create lt-ld.
>
--- Comment #50 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2008-04-21 16:18
---
(In reply to comment #49)
> Subject: Re: [4.3/4.4 Regression]: Combined gcc + binutils
> source tree doesn't bootstrap with --enable-shared
>
>
> > I don't think it is a problem since this problem is limited to
--- Comment #49 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2008-04-21 16:05 ---
Subject: Re: [4.3/4.4 Regression]: Combined gcc + binutils
source tree doesn't bootstrap with --enable-shared
> I don't think it is a problem since this problem is limited to that the
> new linker is used to relink itse
--- Comment #7 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-21 16:04 ---
That explains why I didn't see it with my 4.3.0 build. Lowering severity
again.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from jason at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-21 16:00 ---
Subject: Bug 35678
Author: jason
Date: Mon Apr 21 15:59:36 2008
New Revision: 134515
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=134515
Log:
PR c++/35678
* pt.c (template_template_parm_bindi
--- Comment #6 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-21 15:58 ---
Introduced by PR35056, so it is not a regression against 4.3.0, but against
4.2.x. The ICE is only present in ENABLE_CHECKING builds, otherwise
TARGET_EXPR
with incompatible type is created.
Why do you think the testc
--- Comment #48 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2008-04-21 15:52
---
(In reply to comment #46)
> Subject: Re: [4.3/4.4 Regression]: Combined gcc + binutils
> source tree doesn't bootstrap with --enable-shared
>
>
> > But this is a very unique relink and linker problem. It can on
--- Comment #3 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-21 15:08 ---
This seems to be a vectorizer bug.
vectorizable_conversion is called on
unit size
align 32 symtab 0 alias set 3 canonical type 0x2e9496c0
precision 32
pointer_to_this >
--- Comment #47 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2008-04-21 14:39 ---
Subject: Re: [4.3/4.4 Regression]: Combined gcc + binutils
source tree doesn't bootstrap with --enable-shared
> It is probably possible to generate the wrapper script atomically.
> But this solution can become ugly: on
--- Comment #46 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2008-04-21 14:38 ---
Subject: Re: [4.3/4.4 Regression]: Combined gcc + binutils
source tree doesn't bootstrap with --enable-shared
> But this is a very unique relink and linker problem. It can only happen
> to linker. Why make a simple prob
--- Comment #45 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2008-04-21 14:26
---
(In reply to comment #43)
> Yes, but your patch is, even if not wrong, unsatisfactory. Even though only
> one program suffers from this bug now, it is in general a problem that libtool
> invokes some of the tools
--- Comment #44 from Ralf dot Wildenhues at gmx dot de 2008-04-21 14:13
---
It is probably possible to generate the wrapper script atomically.
But this solution can become ugly: on w32 we may generate also a wrapper
executable.
I still don't see a convincing argument why you don't use
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org
--- Comment #43 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2008-04-21 14:07 ---
Yes, but your patch is, even if not wrong, unsatisfactory. Even though only
one program suffers from this bug now, it is in general a problem that libtool
invokes some of the tools that are being built, and I want to fix i
--- Comment #6 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-21 14:02 ---
Subject: Bug 33415
Author: tromey
Date: Mon Apr 21 14:02:00 2008
New Revision: 134507
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=134507
Log:
libcpp
PR libcpp/33415:
* charset.c (_cpp_conve
--- Comment #5 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-21 14:02 ---
Fixed on trunk.
As I doubt this will be back-ported to 4.3.x, I am closing the bug.
--
tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #42 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2008-04-21 14:01
---
I think my original patch
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2008-03/msg01827.html
is the simplest one since it calls the linker, the only tool which
suffers this bug, from previous stage only in linker directory
--- Comment #41 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2008-04-21 13:53 ---
Ralf, do you think it would be possible to create the script atomically in
ltmain.sh?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35752
--- Comment #40 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2008-04-21 13:36
---
The fix
test -f $lt_prog-recursive && exec $scriptdir/../prev-$dir/$prog
${1+"$@"}
touch $lt_prog-recursive
$scriptdir/../$dir/$prog ${1+"$@"}
result=$?
rm -f $lt_prog-recursive
--- Comment #3 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2008-04-21 13:30 ---
pmmintrin.h is for SSE3. I don't see anything wrong here. If someone
wants to support SSE3 macros on some processors with SSE2, a new header
file may be used.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21408
--- Comment #26 from pluto at agmk dot net 2008-04-21 13:15 ---
and one more testcase, similar to c#24:
extern int i, j, k;
struct X { X(); ~X(); };
bool f()
{
X x;
if ( i && j )
if ( k < 0 ) return true; else return false;
else
return false;
}
tested on gcc-4.3-svn200804
--- Comment #25 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-21 13:07 ---
Reopened per new testcase.
--
manu at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from ktietz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-21 13:03 ---
I agree, that this patch does not break things and the build for this target
gets more silent.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34315
Hi,
We are building a code having the call to the function srand48 and drand48.
Using the older gcc versions which is 4.2.0 the code runs smoothly. However
when compiled using the latest gcc version (4.3.0) it gives the following
error.
testTBuffer.cpp:24: error: ‘srand48’ was not declar
--- Comment #4 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-21 12:54
---
(In reply to comment #3)
> in gthr-win32.h there seems to be a more serious bug. The cast of an integer
> with less size to a pointer can be seriously wrong.
I don't think it's an issue: the type objc_thread_t, w
--- Comment #1 from jorgen at fabeljet dot com 2008-04-21 12:52 ---
Created an attachment (id=15504)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=15504&action=view)
Preprocessed output
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35999
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/tmp$ gcj -v -save-temps -shared -findirect-dispatch
-Wl,-Bsymbolic -fjni -fPIC
../eclipse-x86_64-gcj/plugins/org.eclipse.emf.mapping_2.3.0.v200802051830.jar
Using built-in specs.
Reading specs from /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-linux-gnu/4.2.3/libgcj.spec
rename spec startfile to startfi
--- Comment #1 from jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com 2008-04-21 12:40
---
Created an attachment (id=15503)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=15503&action=view)
GDB workaround.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35998
The source:
procedure AdaFF is
type rec is
record
null;
end record;
X : rec;
begin
null;
end AdaFF;
produces output by:
$ rm -f adaff{,.o,.ali};gnatmake -g adaff.adb ;readelf -a --debug-dump adaff |
grep 'DW_AT_byte_size.*0x'
<30b> DW_AT_byte_size : 0x
--- Comment #3 from ludo at gnu dot org 2008-04-21 12:14 ---
I proposed a patch, which awaits approval and copyright assignment:
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gcc.patches/160923/focus=160991
Ludovic.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28319
Hello
I always have to correct two mispelled file-extension names in the gcc
tar-file. E.g. in the 4.3.0 fileset,
gcc-4.3.0/libstdc++-v3/include/ext/pb_ds/detail/bin_search_tree_/constructors_destructor_fn_imps.hp
gcc-4.3.0/libstdc++-v3/include/ext/pb_ds/detail/resize_policy/hash_load_check_res
--- Comment #4 from kris dot van dot hees at oracle dot com 2008-04-21
11:15 ---
Patch posted to gcc-patches:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2008-04/msg01552.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35981
Code that has a function interface used from two modules can fail if one of the
modules renames the function interface. The example below fails to compile with
this message:
gfortran testfuncinterface.f90
testfuncinterface.f90:21.7:
if ( valid() ) then
1
Error: IF clause at (1) requires
--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-21 09:27 ---
Btw, glibc build fails the same way.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35992
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-21 09:09 ---
Well, this bug needs proper analysis and a testcase, but yes, I also see this
slowdown.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34163
--- Comment #3 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2008-04-21 08:24 ---
Many thanks Roger for your further help on nth_element, excellent news.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35968
--- Comment #2 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2008-04-21 08:24 ---
I guess that H.J. will know what shall we do here.
--
ubizjak at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #38 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2008-04-21 08:21 ---
*** Bug 32301 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
ubizjak at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #3 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2008-04-21 08:21 ---
Duplicate of 14552.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 14552 ***
--
ubizjak at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #8 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2008-04-21 08:07 ---
Fixed for 4.3.0 by:
Author: uros
Date: Sat Jul 14 13:46:40 2007
New Revision: 126639
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=126639
Log:
* config/i386/i386.c (init_mmx_sse_builtins): Define all buil
this simple test code provided by Michael Arntzenius causes gcc to ICE when
built with -fobjc-gc. happens with gcc 4.1/4.2/4.3 on x86_64. x86 seems to
pass OK.
$ cat test.m
#import
@interface Test: Object { int i; }
@end
Test *global_var;
@implementation Test
+initialize {
global_var = [Tes
--- Comment #4 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2008-04-21 07:31 ---
Fixed by the revert.
--
ubizjak at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNE
--- Comment #2 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2008-04-21 07:28 ---
Not a regression on 4.2, so fixed.
--
ubizjak at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2008-04-21 07:26 ---
Not a regression, so the fix won't be backported on release branches.
--
ubizjak at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #15 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2008-04-21 07:18 ---
Closed as invalid.
--
ubizjak at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIR
--- Comment #1 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2008-04-21 07:11 ---
Confirmed.
--
ubizjak at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED
72 matches
Mail list logo
