--- Comment #3 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2010-04-29 06:44
---
Can't be reproduced. See also:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2010-04/msg02712.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2010-04/msg02727.html
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
--- Comment #2 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-29 06:29 ---
Yeah, 65536 is correct (unless int is 16-bit, when it would be undefined
behavior).
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #70 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2010-04-29 06:29 ---
(In reply to comment #69)
> (In reply to comment #64)
> > Subject: Bug 40838
> >
>
> This patch is not sufficient, some applications still crash after I've applied
> it to GCC 4.4 branch (to be more precise gcc-4.4-2010
--- Comment #4 from davek at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-29 05:28 ---
Created an attachment (id=20512)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20512&action=view)
Extends GNU LD to parse archives for LTO.
(In reply to comment #3)
> Ow. I think we need to get LD to help us
--- Comment #2 from justin at mattair dot net 2010-04-29 02:38 ---
Created an attachment (id=20511)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20511&action=view)
patch for patch-xmega
It looks like possibly a copy-paste error was made in the patch-xmega file. The
following star
--- Comment #4 from carrot at google dot com 2010-04-29 02:23 ---
It is not only good to code size, but also benefit performance. For any path to
any successor block, the same number of taken branch executed, but less alu
instructions executed.
It may be difficult to calculate the trade
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gmail dot com 2010-04-29 02:23 ---
Subject: Re: New: gcc handle short overflow failed
Sent from my iPhone
On Apr 28, 2010, at 6:58 PM, "cnstar9988 at gmail dot com"
wrote:
> #include
> #include
>
> int main(int argc, char **argv)
> {
> short i =
Sent from my iPhone
On Apr 28, 2010, at 6:58 PM, "cnstar9988 at gmail dot com" > wrote:
#include
#include
int main(int argc, char **argv)
{
short i = 1;
int n = (int)(i << 16);
fprintf(stderr, "%d\n", n);
return 0;
}
always 65536
it must to 0
No because short is promoted to int
--- Comment #16 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-04-29 02:20
---
This patch:
diff --git a/gcc/predict.c b/gcc/predict.c
index eb5ddef..a05e796 100644
--- a/gcc/predict.c
+++ b/gcc/predict.c
@@ -120,7 +120,8 @@ maybe_hot_frequency_p (int freq)
if (cfun->function_frequency
--- Comment #69 from t dot artem at mailcity dot com 2010-04-29 02:12
---
(In reply to comment #64)
> Subject: Bug 40838
>
This patch is not sufficient, some applications still crash after I've applied
it to GCC 4.4 branch (to be more precise gcc-4.4-20100427.tar.bz2).
I still wonder
#include
#include
int main(int argc, char **argv)
{
short i = 1;
int n = (int)(i << 16);
fprintf(stderr, "%d\n", n);
return 0;
}
always 65536
it must to 0
--
Summary: gcc handle short overflow failed
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status:
--- Comment #15 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-04-29 01:20
---
Revision 139756:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2008-08/msg01321.html
also contributed to this regression.
[...@gnu-26 rrs]$ ./131573/usr/bin/gcc -O3 pr43884.c
[...@gnu-26 rrs]$ time ./a.out 45
fib(45)=1134903170
--- Comment #2 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2010-04-29 00:23
---
And in any case I can't reproduce it. I also tried running the testcase (both
-m32/-m64) outside the testsuite tens of times.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43929
--- Comment #3 from davek at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 23:49 ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> Quoting RG from the gcc list:
>
> "[ ... ] Or you fix collect2 to do processing of archives and hand
> lto1 the required information (it expects archive components
> with LTO bytecode like a
--
steven at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfir
--- Comment #5 from kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 23:07 ---
Comment propagated from the duplicate PR.
It appears to be an in-lining issue. This reduced case
program main
implicit none
call build (77)
contains
subroutine build (order)
integer :: order, i, j
ca
--- Comment #4 from kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 23:06 ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> Subject: Re: [4.6 Regression] FAIL:
> gfortran.dg/array_constructor_11.f90
>
> Looks like latent problem that we fail when optimiznig for size.
>
It appears to be an in-lining i
--- Comment #14 from bergner at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 22:53
---
Subject: Bug 41081
Author: bergner
Date: Wed Apr 28 22:52:57 2010
New Revision: 158846
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=158846
Log:
Backport from mainline:
2009-08-23 Alan Mo
--- Comment #1 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2010-04-28 22:47
---
Then this is a miscompilation isn't it? I don't think we should categorize it
as libstdc++...
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43929
--- Comment #9 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 22:42
---
The never ending story of qsort on Solaris 8:
Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
0x000100bb7204 in allocno_priority_compare_func (v1p=0x102f3d268,
v2p=0x102f3d278) at /nile.build/botcazo
On Linux/x86-64, revision 158830:
FAIL: 30_threads/condition_variable_any/members/2.cc execution test
Revision 158810 is OK.
--
Summary: [4.6 Regression] FAIL:
30_threads/condition_variable_any/members/2.cc execution
test
Product: g
--- Comment #8 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 22:31
---
Thanks, Steven.
So, one year later, ...
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #3 from hubicka at ucw dot cz 2010-04-28 22:20 ---
Subject: Re: [4.6 Regression] FAIL:
gfortran.dg/array_constructor_11.f90
Looks like latent problem that we fail when optimiznig for size.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43928
--- Comment #11 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld dot DE 2010-04-28
22:17 ---
Subject: Re: Configure scripts have no 64-Bit Solaris defined (only
i386-solaris*).
> --- Comment #10 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 22:09
> ---
> While the advantages of spar
--- Comment #10 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 22:09
---
> Adding an additional 64-bit default configuration
> (like amd64-pc-solaris2* or whatever) doubles the testing burden on me for no
> real benefit. In fact, I believe that the sparcv9-sun-solaris2 configurations
--- Comment #4 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-04-28 22:01 ---
It is caused by revision 158788:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2010-04/msg00895.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43924
--- Comment #5 from justin dot lebar+bug at gmail dot com 2010-04-28 21:56
---
Is there a workaround for this, short of writing inline assembly?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43118
--- Comment #3 from kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 21:35 ---
*** Bug 43928 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #2 from kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 21:35 ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 43924 ***
--
kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #6 from darlingm at gmail dot com 2010-04-28 21:27 ---
Looks good, thanks!
No more internal compiler error, and now nicely says "error: '' is not
captured", where is of course the name of the uncaptured variable.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=4
--- Comment #1 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-04-28 21:18 ---
It may be caused by revision 158788:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2010-04/msg00895.html
--
hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
On Linux/x86, revision 158788 gave
FAIL: gfortran.dg/array_constructor_11.f90 -O3 -g (internal compiler error)
FAIL: gfortran.dg/array_constructor_11.f90 -O3 -g (test for excess errors)
Revision 158783 is OK.
--
Summary: [4.6 Regression] FAIL:
gfortran.dg/arr
--- Comment #13 from ro at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 21:03 ---
Dup of PR libffi/26048.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 26048 ***
--
ro at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #11 from ro at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 21:03 ---
*** Bug 20730 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
ro at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #12 from ro at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 21:02 ---
Mine.
--
ro at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc d
--- Comment #6 from ro at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 20:54 ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 39150 ***
--
ro at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #9 from ro at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 20:54 ---
*** Bug 30726 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
ro at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #5 from ro at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 20:54 ---
Mine.
--
ro at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc do
gcc -g -fkeep-inline-functions -DIN_GCC -W -Wall -Wwrite-strings -Wcast-qual
-Wstrict-prototypes -Wmissing-prototypes -Wmissing-format-attribute -pedantic
-Wno-long-long -Wno-variadic-macros -Wno-overlength-strings
-Wold-style-definition -Wc++-compat -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -DGENERATOR_FILE -o
build/
--- Comment #7 from pluto at agmk dot net 2010-04-28 20:51 ---
*** Bug 28845 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
pluto at agmk dot net changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #5 from pluto at agmk dot net 2010-04-28 20:51 ---
fixed/dup.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 37454 ***
--
pluto at agmk dot net changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #4 from pluto at agmk dot net 2010-04-28 20:51 ---
to mark 'as fixed'...
--
pluto at agmk dot net changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED
--- Comment #15 from dougmencken at gmail dot com 2010-04-28 20:46 ---
(In reply to comment #14)
$ ../gcc-4.5.0.srcpkg/configure --prefix=/usr --sysconfdir=/etc
--mandir=/usr/share/man \
> --with-system-zlib --enable-languages=c,c++,fortran \
> --disable-nls --disable-werror --disable-m
--- Comment #3 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 20:43 ---
FIXED on the trunk.
--
burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Statu
--- Comment #2 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 20:43 ---
Subject: Bug 43919
Author: burnus
Date: Wed Apr 28 20:43:18 2010
New Revision: 158843
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=158843
Log:
2010-04-28 Tobias Burnus
PR fortran/18918
P
--- Comment #24 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 20:43 ---
Subject: Bug 18918
Author: burnus
Date: Wed Apr 28 20:43:18 2010
New Revision: 158843
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=158843
Log:
2010-04-28 Tobias Burnus
PR fortran/18918
--- Comment #5 from ro at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 20:40 ---
Unless there are very important reasons (and I don't see any since the
underlying
libthread and libpthread implementation on Solaris 2 is identical, just the
interfaces differ), please stick with the default, posix. This
--
burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu dot
|
--- Comment #6 from ro at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 20:34 ---
Fixed for 4.5.1, 4.6.0.
--
ro at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
URL|
--- Comment #5 from ro at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 20:32 ---
Mine.
--
ro at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc do
--- Comment #1 from ro at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 20:27 ---
*** Bug 38685 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
ro at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #9 from ro at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 20:27 ---
Dup of PR other/43445.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 43445 ***
--
ro at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #4 from ro at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 20:16 ---
... to close as INVALID.
--
ro at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|U
--- Comment #3 from ro at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 20:16 ---
Reopened ...
--
ro at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|VERIFIED
--- Comment #13 from ro at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 20:15 ---
... to close as FIXED.
--
ro at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RE
--- Comment #12 from ro at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 20:15 ---
Reopened ...
--
ro at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|VERIFIED
--- Comment #21 from ro at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 20:14 ---
... to close as FIXED.
--
ro at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RE
--- Comment #20 from ro at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 20:13 ---
Reopened ...
--
ro at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|VERIFIED
--- Comment #6 from ro at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 20:13 ---
... to close as FIXED.
--
ro at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REO
--- Comment #5 from ro at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 20:12 ---
Reopened ...
--
ro at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|VERIFIED
--- Comment #10 from ro at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 20:12 ---
... to close as FIXED.
--
ro at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RE
--- Comment #9 from ro at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 20:11 ---
Reopened ...
--
ro at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|VERIFIED
--- Comment #2 from ro at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 20:10 ---
Confirmed. At least Solaris 2 target is affected.
--
ro at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #14 from redi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 20:08 ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> $ g++ -v test.c\+\+
>
> Using built-in specs.
> COLLECT_GCC=g++
> COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/usr/libexec/gcc/powerpc-gnu-linux-uclibc/4.5.0/lto-wrapper
> Target: powerpc-gnu-linux-uclibc
> Configu
--- Comment #4 from ro at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 20:06 ---
Fixed for 4.5.0.
--
ro at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
URL|
--- Comment #3 from ro at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 20:04 ---
Mine.
--
ro at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc do
--- Comment #7 from ro at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 20:00 ---
As I've said before: please file *clear individual bug reports* for each single
issue you find. Dealing with reports like this, with dozens of issues and non-
issues mixed, is close to impossible.
--
ro at gcc dot gn
--- Comment #13 from dougmencken at gmail dot com 2010-04-28 19:57 ---
Created an attachment (id=20510)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20510&action=view)
./powerpc-gnu-linux-uclibc/libstdc++-v3/config.log
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43911
--- Comment #8 from ro at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 19:56 ---
As stated: closing as WONTFIX.
--
ro at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
St
--- Comment #7 from ro at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 19:55 ---
As long as there are any Solaris 2/x86 versions supported with 32-bit kernels,
we'll need to keep the i386-pc-solaris2* configurations, which handles creating
64-bit binaries just fine. Adding an additional 64-bit defaul
--- Comment #7 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 19:54 ---
Created an attachment (id=20509)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=20509&action=view)
preprocessed test case, copied from comment #0
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39883
--- Comment #15 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 19:50 ---
Re. comment #14, this is obviously related to LTO but we (gcc) don't do
anything with relocations. I'll try to reproduce this problem, but I suspect it
is an assembler or linker bug.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzil
--- Comment #6 from ro at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 19:47 ---
Please try this with an absolute path to configure. Perhaps we should simply
document that relative paths aren't supported here.
--
ro at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #6 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 19:41
---
> Preprocessed source is embedded in the original submission.
Yes, that's precisely why I asked to attach it instead.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39883
--- Comment #2 from ro at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 19:40 ---
It's pretty much impossible to deal with PRs that bundle dozens of different
issues together (or with postings to gcc-testresults that have almost as much
boilerplate, comments and explantions as actual results).
Many of
--- Comment #12 from dougmencken at gmail dot com 2010-04-28 19:36 ---
$ objdump -T /usr/lib/libgcc_s.so.1 | grep GetIPI
# i.e. nothing
$ objdump -T /usr/lib/libgcc_s.so.1 | grep Unwind
00010a80 gDF .text 0244 GCC_3.0 _Unwind_Find_FDE
bd78 gDF .text 0008 GCC_3
--- Comment #26 from bernds at codesourcery dot com 2010-04-28 19:33
---
Ah! I think that makes sense. For some reason I only looked at the other use of
df_simulate_find_noclobber_defs.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43858
--- Comment #5 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld dot DE 2010-04-28
19:30 ---
Subject: Re: preprocessor fails with myassertion
>> Maybe Eric has a sparcv9 compiler around and can easily check this?
>
> I only have 4.3.5, 4.5.1 and 4.6.0 compilers for sparc64-sun-solaris2.x at the
>
--- Comment #2 from ro at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 19:28 ---
On SPARC, I only see this when configuring with gas and gld, which isn't
apparent
in your g++ -v output.
On x86, I see the error with Sun as and gas with Sun ld and gas with GNU ld.
--
ro at gcc dot gnu dot org chang
--- Comment #25 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2010-04-28 19:27 ---
The following change applied on top of revision 158827 is enough to reach stage
3 (and probably to bootstrap -answer tomorrow):
--- ../_gcc_clean/gcc/ifcvt.c 2010-04-22 13:23:31.0 +0200
+++ ../gcc-4.6-work
--- Comment #2 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2010-04-28 19:21 ---
I did not filled the triplets since I see the ICE on *-darwin-* and *-linux-*
as well.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43924
--- Comment #1 from ro at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 19:21 ---
Ok, although we should only do this on Solaris 10 and up. At the moment, only
very few specialized libraries are affected since compatibility links exist in
/usr/lib.
--
ro at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
--- Comment #4 from redi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 19:20 ---
*** Bug 31902 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
redi at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #4 from redi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 19:20 ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 30797 ***
--
redi at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from ro at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 19:15 ---
One part of this PR (supporting COMDAT group on Solaris 2 with GNU as) is
implemented by this patch:
[build, doc] Support COMDAT group with recent Sun ld
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-03/msg01482.html
which
--- Comment #3 from fabien dot chene at gmail dot com 2010-04-28 19:14
---
patch here:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-04/msg01759.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43890
--- Comment #1 from ro at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 19:08 ---
Right: this is both a regression from 3.4 and in violation of the DWARF-3 spec,
p. 63, 5.1, where DW_AT_name is a required field for DW_TAG_base_type.
--
ro at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #1 from kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 19:08 ---
The regression is also seen on i686-*-freebsd. The
regression dissappears if r158788 is reverted.
--
kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #13 from rus at google dot com 2010-04-28 19:06 ---
Subject: Re: ext/profile/all.cc fails on Solaris
On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 11:36 AM, ro at gcc dot gnu dot org
wrote:
>
>
> --- Comment #12 from ro at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 18:36 ---
> Any progress on this
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 18:55 ---
>32
I think you don't have the 32bit userland fully installed. Either use
--disable-multilib or install the 32bit userland.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
I am trying to install gcc version 4.5.0. I have untarred and placed the latest
versions of gmp (5.0.1). mpc (0.8.1) and mpfr (2.4.2) into my source directory,
and I am building in a separate directory.
My system is SuSE Linux version 2.6.5-7.244-smp and I currently have gcc v3.3.3
installed curre
--- Comment #28 from jason at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 18:49 ---
Agreed.
--
jason at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #5 from redi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 18:47 ---
compiles without error using 4.4.3 or 4.6.0
--
redi at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #4 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 18:46
---
> I'll try to go through the Solaris bugs in the near future, but have
> concentrated on getting the 4.5 release in shape until now.
I totally missed it as well...
> Maybe Eric has a sparcv9 compiler around and
--- Comment #14 from ro at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 18:45 ---
The bug was fixed for 4.5 by this patch:
PATCH: Fix IRIX 6.5/Solaris 2 for GCC (PR libfortran/41169)
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-09/msg00114.html
with a subsequent fix by Ralf Wildenhues.
The 4.4 branc
--- Comment #4 from redi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 18:40 ---
No, that's not what pair::swap looks like in 4.5.0, your installation is
broken. This is what I have in 4.5.0
void
swap(pair& __p)
{
using std::swap;
swap(first, __p.first);
sw
--- Comment #23 from redi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 18:38 ---
core2 works fine for bi-arch linux builds, but I'll try your suggestion on
Solaris asap
I assume it will work, but 64bit code will not use the core2 instructions,
which might be suboptimal (I want to use the cpu to th
--- Comment #12 from ro at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 18:36 ---
Any progress on this? The bug is open for almost 2 months now.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43259
--- Comment #3 from ro at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-28 18:35 ---
I couldn't reproduce this so far, neither on the 4.4 branch nor on mainline.
OTOH, I don't have snv_111b available here, but know that there are EH issues
on Solaris 11/x86. I've posted a patch which works for snv_130/13
--- Comment #1 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-04-28 18:24 ---
A patch is posed at
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-04/msg01755.html
--
hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
1 - 100 of 179 matches
Mail list logo
