--- Comment #15 from aoliva at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-06 06:09 ---
Err, I messed up my testing. #c9 is not fixed, I was looking at cprop dumps
(as in #c10), not regmove. Sorry. Looking into it now.
--
aoliva at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #14 from aoliva at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-06 06:05 ---
The patch that introduces debug temps fixes the problem in #c9.
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-10/msg00112.html
As for the testcase in #c10, the behavior is correct. If the pseudo holding a
value becomes de
--- Comment #6 from aoliva at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-06 04:38 ---
The patch that introduces debug temps fixes this problem:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-10/msg00112.html
--
aoliva at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #17 from aoliva at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-06 04:38 ---
This patch fixes the problem:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-10/msg00112.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41343
--- Comment #2 from aoliva at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-06 04:25 ---
The patch that introduces debug temps fixes this bug.
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-10/msg00112.html
--
aoliva at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #16 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-06 03:12
---
Subject: Bug 35862
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Tue Oct 6 03:12:21 2009
New Revision: 152484
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=152484
Log:
2009-10-05 Jerry DeLisle
PR libgfortran/358
--- Comment #15 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-06 03:08
---
Subject: Bug 35862
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Tue Oct 6 03:08:20 2009
New Revision: 152483
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=152483
Log:
2009-10-05 Jerry DeLisle
PR libgfortran/358
--- Comment #39 from howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu 2009-10-06
02:19 ---
Mike,
Does darwin have named sections? If so, we can drop the check on
!targetm.have_named_sections.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41313
--- Comment #38 from howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu 2009-10-06
02:18 ---
Created an attachment (id=18718)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18718&action=view)
patch to handle unwind label and -freorder-blocks-and-partition control in
darwin.c
--
howarth at
--- Comment #8 from davine at poczta dot onet dot pl 2009-10-06 02:13
---
Thanks and sorry for the false alarm...
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41592
--- Comment #37 from howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu 2009-10-06
02:05 ---
Opps. In both of the last patch...
+ if ((darwin_macosx_version_min && strverscmp(darwin_macosx_version_min,
"10.6") >= 0) || flag_reorder_blocks_and_partition)
should be
+ if (!(darwin_macosx_version
--- Comment #36 from howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu 2009-10-06
02:02 ---
This can be factored down to...
Index: gcc/config/darwin.c
===
--- gcc/config/darwin.c (revision 152481)
+++ gcc/config/darwin.c (working co
--- Comment #6 from danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-06 01:54 ---
Neither -O3 or __attribute__((always_inline)) work. There are four
instances of "\\(DIE \\(.*?\\) DW_TAG_lexical_block" and "\\(DIE \\(.*?\\)
DW_TAG_lexical_block" in the assembly output. Reviewing the assembler,
a
--- Comment #35 from howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu 2009-10-06
00:51 ---
Testing...
Index: gcc/config/darwin.c
===
--- gcc/config/darwin.c (revision 152480)
+++ gcc/config/darwin.c (working copy)
@@ -1454,7 +1454,
--- Comment #3 from lucier at math dot purdue dot edu 2009-10-06 00:51
---
Now I'm getting comparison errors with
[trunk revision 152459]
and the same configuration:
Comparing stages 2 and 3
warning: gcc/cc1plus-checksum.o differs
warning: gcc/cc1-checksum.o differs
Bootstrap compari
--- Comment #1 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2009-10-06 00:10 ---
Subject: Re: New: Bad .comm directive
On Mon, 5 Oct 2009, danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> The directive is:
>
> .comm gnu_lto_v1,1,1
>
> This apparently comes from here:
>
> /* Emit LTO mar
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.5.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41545
--- Comment #34 from howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu 2009-10-05
23:25 ---
Actually, I just noticed that with the latest patch we still fail...
gcc.dg/tree-prof/pr34999.c
Executing on host:
/sw/src/fink.build/gcc45-4.4.999-20091003/darwin_objdir/gcc/xgcc
-B/sw/src/fink.build/gc
--- Comment #2 from espindola at google dot com 2009-10-05 23:12 ---
Created an attachment (id=18717)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18717&action=view)
testcase
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41598
--- Comment #1 from espindola at google dot com 2009-10-05 23:12 ---
Created an attachment (id=18716)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18716&action=view)
testcase
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41598
To reproduce with the delta reduced test
cc1 dwarf2out.i -quiet -O2 -flto -o dwarf2out.s
as -V -Qy -o dwarf2out.o dwarf2out.s
cc1 c-decl.i -quiet -O2 -flto -o c-decl.s
as -V -Qy -o c-decl.o c-decl.s
lto1 -quiet -O2 c-decl.o dwarf2out.o -o /dev/null
Produces:
--- Comment #6 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-05 22:22 ---
Fixed.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|major
--- Comment #2 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-10-05 22:22
---
Likewise...
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-10-05 22:22
---
Let's CC Jason...
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Executing on host: /test/gnu/gcc/objdir/gcc/xgcc -B/test/gnu/gcc/objdir/gcc/
-
O2 -flto -w -c -o 2105-1.o
/test/gnu/gcc/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/c
ompile/2105-1.c(timeout = 300)
/var/tmp//cc74uIsZ.s: Assembler messages:
/var/tmp//cc74uIsZ.s:105: Error: bad or irreducible abso
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.5.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41205
--- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-05 22:07 ---
I just was able to compile this using the lto branch as the starting GCC since
that was the newest powerpc-linux-gnu build I had.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41491
--- Comment #1 from sylvain dot pion at sophia dot inria dot fr 2009-10-05
21:52 ---
Problem still present as of today's trunk.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39866
--- Comment #1 from sylvain dot pion at sophia dot inria dot fr 2009-10-05
21:51 ---
Same situation as of today's trunk.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39863
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-05 21:46 ---
***
mudflap violation 1 (check/write): time=1254779079.565574 ptr=0x7fffe830
size=8
pc=0x2abccec1 location=`t.cc:3:37 (desc::desc)'
/home/pinskia/local-gcc/lib64/libmudflap.so.0(__mf_check+0x41)
[0x
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.5.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41239
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.5.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41240
--- Comment #8 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-05 21:41 ---
Fixed in 4.5.0 so closing as fixed.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-05 21:39 ---
This works for me on the trunk. At least on x86_64-linux-gnu.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41559
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-05 21:16 ---
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-09/msg02102.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41554
--- Comment #2 from mrs at apple dot com 2009-10-05 21:21 ---
Ok.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41595
--- Comment #33 from mrs at apple dot com 2009-10-05 21:16 ---
I'm fine with the latest patch.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41313
--- Comment #2 from laurent at guerby dot net 2009-10-05 21:15 ---
Not set for gnat1 (Ada):
(gdb) b gate_lto_out
Breakpoint 1 at 0xedd700: file ../../trunk/gcc/lto-streamer.c, line 803.
(gdb) r -quiet -dumpbase p.adb -auxbase p -O3 -flto -mtune=generic p.adb -o
/tmp/cclbAgyw.s
Starting
--- Comment #32 from mrs at apple dot com 2009-10-05 20:55 ---
I suspect the other case is simply:
if (flag_exceptions)
flag_reorder_blocks_and_partition = 0;
be added, just like the code for flag_unwind_tables. I suspect this, as the
testcase is *.C.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugz
--- Comment #1 from developer at sandoe-acoustics dot co dot uk 2009-10-05
20:25 ---
Created an attachment (id=18715)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18715&action=view)
allow specification of -static-libstdc++ on the CL while generating PCH
this patch alters the beh
The recognition of any library-related option in g++-spec.c causes the
insertion of "-lstdc++". This causes link to be invoked when trying to
generate PCH, which then fails. This bit me when trying to run the testsuite
with /-static-libstdc++
The behavior here appears to differ from gcc where o
--- Comment #6 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-05 20:16 ---
This is fixed on the trunk
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #9 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-05 20:09 ---
The warning is gone but the issue still exist.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #5 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-05 20:06 ---
Confirmed.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|block
--- Comment #1 from developer at sandoe-acoustics dot co dot uk 2009-10-05
20:04 ---
Created an attachment (id=18714)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18714&action=view)
recognize name-mangled obj-c++ internal symbols.
this is modeled on the mechanism of the fix for
Originally (radar: 5202926)
we need to make objective c internal labels local. At present the name-mangled
ones are not recognized.
--
Summary: object-c++ mangled local labels are not correctly
recognized.
Product: gcc
Version: 4.5.0
--- Comment #2 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-05 19:51 ---
Subject: Bug 41558
Author: jakub
Date: Mon Oct 5 19:50:57 2009
New Revision: 152467
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=152467
Log:
PR debug/41558
* dwarf2out.c (loc_by_reference):
--- Comment #7 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2009-10-05 19:46 ---
Subject: Re: Misnamed hpp files in gcc-4.4.1.tar.bz2
from ftp://gd.tuwien.ac.at
On Mon, 5 Oct 2009, davine at poczta dot onet dot pl wrote:
> of 2 files and no real corruption? (the build was successful) If anyt
--- Comment #1 from developer at sandoe-acoustics dot co dot uk 2009-10-05
19:39 ---
Created an attachment (id=18713)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18713&action=view)
recognize "-static-libstdc++" as a valid option
log:
*gcc/gcc.c: Add -static-libstdc++ to
although the option is parsed by g++spec.c it is not accepted by gcc.
--
Summary: -static-libstdc++ is not recognized as valid by the gcc
driver.
Product: gcc
Version: 4.5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
--- Comment #12 from kirill at shutemov dot name 2009-10-05 19:34 ---
Yes, it works.
Thanks.
--
kirill at shutemov dot name changed:
What|Removed |Added
Stat
--- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-05 18:55 ---
This was caused by:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=revision&revision=149722
tem = fold_build2_loc (loc, code, type,
fold_convert_loc (loc, TREE_TYPE (op0),
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-05 18:45 ---
Before:
t.c:4:35>>
After:
t.c:4:7>>
This is on the compound_expr's operand 1 which is eq_expr.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41451
../trunk/configure --enable-languages=c,lto --enable-__cxa_atexit --disable-nls
--enable-threads=posix --with-mpfr=/opt/cfarm/mpfr-2.4.1/
--with-gmp=/opt/cfarm/gmp-4.2.4/ --prefix=/n/16/guerby/install-trunk
--with-libelf=/opt/cfarm/libelf-0.8.12
...
checking for the correct version of libelf... ye
--- Comment #6 from davine at poczta dot onet dot pl 2009-10-05 18:08
---
Wouldn't you consider it strange that a wrong md5 would only cause a renaming
of 2 files and no real corruption? (the build was successful) If anything it
must be something with my tar, perhaps it's too old? (vers
--- Comment #6 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-10-05 17:59
---
Fixed.
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Mileston
--- Comment #31 from howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu 2009-10-05
18:05 ---
(In reply to comment #12)
> It is unclear what those labels are good for, but if darwin is to support
> hot/cold partitioning and FDEs covering it, the emit unwind_label hook (which
> is apparently darwin
--- Comment #5 from redi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-05 17:59 ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> Could you elaborate? Did you mean a wrong tar for creating a tarball?
No, he said untar.
I just downloaded the file from that mirror and it matches its md5 sum,
extracts without errors, and
--- Comment #5 from paolo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-05 17:56 ---
Subject: Bug 41530
Author: paolo
Date: Mon Oct 5 17:56:02 2009
New Revision: 152461
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=152461
Log:
2009-10-05 John Bytheway
PR libstdc++/41530
*
--- Comment #6 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-05 17:53
---
After the longest freeze ever :-)
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #2 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-05 17:50 ---
Draft patch at http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-10/msg00300.html,
has room for improvements.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41591
--- Comment #8 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-05 17:48 ---
Doubt it is the same as 40992 as this does not use inline-asm that much.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-05 17:48
---
Subject: Bug 41511
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Mon Oct 5 17:48:09 2009
New Revision: 152459
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=152459
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/41511
* combine.c (r
--- Comment #4 from jbytheway at gmail dot com 2009-10-05 17:48 ---
I've added my name to my account details. You should see it up there somewhere
^^.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41530
--- Comment #7 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-05 17:46 ---
Fixed on the trunk.
--- Comment #8 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-05 17:46 ---
Subject: Bug 40992
Author: pinskia
Date: Mon Oct 5 17:46:35 2009
New Revision: 152458
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/
--- Comment #7 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-05 17:46 ---
Fixed on the trunk.
--- Comment #8 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-05 17:46 ---
Subject: Bug 40992
Author: pinskia
Date: Mon Oct 5 17:46:35 2009
New Revision: 152458
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/
--- Comment #4 from davine at poczta dot onet dot pl 2009-10-05 17:31
---
Could you elaborate? Did you mean a wrong tar for creating a tarball? I'm
ceratinly using gnu tar here and have never had any such problems.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41592
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-05 17:23 ---
The problem usually stems from using the wrong tar to untar it.
GNU tar is usually the best tar to use for the gcc sources.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41592
--- Comment #2 from davine at poczta dot onet dot pl 2009-10-05 17:20
---
Still I hope the mirrored file gets fixed. Thanks
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41592
--- Comment #7 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-05 17:07 ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> I use binutils 2.19 (from opensuse 11.1).
What I meant was that -ffunction-sections -fdata-sections and then
-Wl,--gc-sections to remove the unused variables/functions.
--
http://gcc.
--- Comment #2 from dirk dot herrmann-privat at gmx dot de 2009-10-05
16:48 ---
Hi,
thanks for considering my report.
The relevant sections seem to be (these were pointed out to me on comp.lang.ada
by Adam Beneschan):
4.9(38) : "For a real static expression that is not part of a larg
--- Comment #6 from dougkwan at google dot com 2009-10-05 15:48 ---
Subject: Re: Distribute floating point
expressions causes bad code.
Just saw Diego's e-mail about the me breaking the freeze. Sorry I
should have checked that before checking thing in. It was just my
bad.
2
--- Comment #5 from dougkwan at google dot com 2009-10-05 15:44 ---
Subject: Re: Distribute floating point
expressions causes bad code.
I am aware of the fact the stage one has ended but this is a bug fix,
not an experimental new feature. Did I break a code freeze? If so, I
--- Comment #6 from andi-gcc at firstfloor dot org 2009-10-05 15:42 ---
I use binutils 2.19 (from opensuse 11.1).
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41589
--- Comment #1 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-10-05 15:42
---
The files are definitely named correctly in SVN.
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
Hi,
It looks like the following file from one of the gcc mirrors:
ftp://gd.tuwien.ac.at/gnu/gcc/releases/gcc-4.4.1/gcc-4.4.1.tar.bz2
has two .hpp files misnamed as .hp which causes the build to fail, namely:
hash_load_check_resize_trigger_imp.hp
constructors_destructor_fn_imps.hp
--
--- Comment #1 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-05 15:17 ---
Does not need to be a component or derived type, any scalar leaks:
integer , allocatable :: a
allocate(a)
a = 42
end
MAIN__ ()
{
integer(kind=4) * a;
{
void * restrict D.1366;
D.1366 = (void * restrict)
--- Comment #5 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-05 15:16 ---
I think this optimization is up to the linker as the variables are marked as
hidden and not marked as local to the Translational unit.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41589
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-05 15:14 ---
Namelookup is done before access control IIRC.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41575
--- Comment #3 from dmitry at lsi dot upc dot edu 2009-10-05 14:42 ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> This is not a bug, local classes cannot be template arguments.
>
What does prevent them to be?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31951
--- Comment #4 from redi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-05 14:58 ---
14.3.1 [temp.arg.type] paragraph 2 in the current C++ standard says:
A type without linkage (3.5) shall not be used as a template argument for a
template type parameter.
This is changing for C++0x, based on the p
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-05 14:37 ---
Confirmed.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCON
e.g. when -fwhole-program should be specified, at compile or at line time
and that it applies to the object files
I figured it out using the source and #gcc, but it would be better in
the texinfo file.
--
Summary: documentation should document interaction of -flto and -
--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-05 14:31 ---
Fixed.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-05 14:30 ---
Subject: Bug 41281
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Oct 5 14:30:10 2009
New Revision: 152453
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=152453
Log:
2009-10-05 Richard Guenther
PR lto/41281
--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-05 14:28 ---
Fixed.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
hed user-alignment.
* gcc.dg/lto/20091005-1_0.c: New testcase.
* gcc.dg/lto/20091005-1_1.c: Likewise.
Added:
trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/lto/20091005-1_0.c
trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/lto/20091005-1_1.c
Modified:
trunk/gcc/ChangeLog
trunk/gcc/lto-symtab.c
trunk/gcc/t
--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-05 14:20 ---
Confirmed.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
--- Comment #14 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-05 14:17
---
Fixed.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNE
--- Comment #7 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-05 14:16 ---
Fixed.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
When investigating PR lto/40702, I noticed that no definition of __STDC__ is
emitted at all in the output of gcc -g3 -save-temps, making it very hard to
understand why conditional pieces of code are used.
$ cat head.h
#define HEAD 1
$ cat stdc0.c
#include
#define STDC0
$ gcc -I. -g3 -save-temps -
--- Comment #6 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-05 14:06 ---
Subject: Bug 41552
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Oct 5 14:05:54 2009
New Revision: 152450
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=152450
Log:
2009-10-05 Richard Guenther
PR lto/41552
--- Comment #13 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-05 14:06
---
Subject: Bug 41487
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Oct 5 14:05:54 2009
New Revision: 152450
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=152450
Log:
2009-10-05 Richard Guenther
PR lto/41552
--- Comment #4 from ro at techfak dot uni-bielefeld dot de 2009-10-05
14:05 ---
Subject: Re: lto-elf.c fails to compile on Solaris
> --- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-10-05 13:13
> ---
> That's weird. So is this a libelf bug after all or can we somehow
--- Comment #3 from andi-gcc at firstfloor dot org 2009-10-05 14:04 ---
Created an attachment (id=18712)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18712&action=view)
Makefile.lto
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41589
--- Comment #2 from andi-gcc at firstfloor dot org 2009-10-05 14:04 ---
Created an attachment (id=18711)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18711&action=view)
tlto2.c
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41589
Using built-in specs.
COLLECT_GCC=gcc45
COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/pkg/gcc-4.5-091004/bin/../libexec/gcc/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/4.5.0/lto-wrapper
Target: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
Configured with: ../gcc/configure --prefix=/pkg/gcc-4.5-091004
--enable-checking=release --enable-languages=c,c++ --disable-
--- Comment #1 from andi-gcc at firstfloor dot org 2009-10-05 14:04 ---
Created an attachment (id=18710)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18710&action=view)
tlto1.c
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41589
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |blocker
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41588
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
BugsThisDependsOn||41526, 41528, 41529, 41550,
|
1 - 100 of 159 matches
Mail list logo
