http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47241
Kai Tietz changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|WAITING
Resolution|FIXED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42368
--- Comment #2 from charlet at adacore dot com
2011-02-09 07:43:15 UTC ---
> Ping on this. Would a patch be OK?
Depending on the patch, yes.
> Ping on this. Would a patch be OK?
Depending on the patch, yes.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47648
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47583
--- Comment #12 from Harald Klimach 2011-02-09
06:37:02 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #11)
Thanks a lot for taking the time to properly incorporate the fix!
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47583
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47583
--- Comment #10 from Jerry DeLisle 2011-02-09
06:07:18 UTC ---
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Wed Feb 9 06:07:14 2011
New Revision: 169962
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=169962
Log:
2011-02-08 Jerry DeLisle
PR fortran/47
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47656
Summary: libgo.so has writable executable stack
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: go
AssignedTo: i...@airs.com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47324
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ian at airs dot com
--- Comment #21 fr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47583
--- Comment #9 from Jerry DeLisle 2011-02-09
05:17:51 UTC ---
I will test and commit the patch. Thanks.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47324
--- Comment #20 from Jack Howarth 2011-02-09
05:10:26 UTC ---
Tested...
Index: gcc/dwarf2out.c
===
--- gcc/dwarf2out.c(revision 169960)
+++ gcc/dwarf2out.c(working copy)
@@
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47655
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47654
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47653
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47241
coolypf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47324
--- Comment #19 from Jack Howarth 2011-02-09
02:50:21 UTC ---
Could this be the problem code?
static void
output_cfa_loc (dw_cfi_ref cfi)
{
dw_loc_descr_ref loc;
unsigned long size;
if (cfi->dw_cfi_opc == DW_CFA_expression)
{
dw
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47617
--- Comment #8 from cck0011 at yahoo dot com 2011-02-09 02:08:23 UTC ---
Hi folks,
First, thanks for working on this.
Second, I read the link and I _think_ I understand it. Let me paraphrase it
back to you and you can tell me if I've got the
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47324
--- Comment #18 from Jack Howarth 2011-02-09
02:03:46 UTC ---
It may be...
--- trunk/gcc/dwarf2out.c2010/03/26 19:21:13157761
+++ trunk/gcc/dwarf2out.c2010/03/26 20:53:58157762
@@ -1115,8 +1115,8 @@
&& sreg == INVALID_REGN
oog-ppl/
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.6.0 20110208 (experimental) (GCC)
$ gcc -O -floop-block testcase.c
$ ./a.out
Aborted
Tested revisions:
r169929 - fail
4.5.2 - OK
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47619
--- Comment #13 from Ian Lance Taylor 2011-02-09 01:33:53
UTC ---
I'm stumped. Everything looks OK, but it also looks like the stack is getting
overrun. The function foo is asking for 0x4000 bytes in addition to what it
needs itself; that shoul
ith-cloog-include=/usr/include/cloog-ppl/
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.6.0 20110208 (experimental) (GCC)
$ gcc -O -floop-block testcase.c
$ ./a.out
Aborted
Tested revisions:
r169929 - fail
4.5.2 - OK
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47324
--- Comment #17 from Jack Howarth 2011-02-09
00:59:37 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Fri Mar 26 20:53:58 2010
New Revision: 157762
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=157762
Log:
PR debug/43540
* dwarf2out.c (reg_save): Fo
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47548
--- Comment #7 from dj at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-02-09
00:54:34 UTC ---
Author: dj
Date: Wed Feb 9 00:54:31 2011
New Revision: 169959
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=169959
Log:
PR target/47548
* config/m32c/m32c.c (m32c_sub
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47642
--- Comment #8 from Anton Shterenlikht 2011-02-09
00:43:07 UTC ---
With Gerald's patch (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47649)
I got gcc46 installed on FreeBSD sparc64,
and there I don't get segfault:
QOF> uname -a
FreeBSD mech-anton
usr/include/cloog-ppl/
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.6.0 20110208 (experimental) (GCC)
$ gcc -O -fstack-check=generic -ftree-pre -fgraphite-identity testcase.c
$ ./a.out
Segmentation fault
Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
0x00400552 in main () at testcase.c:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47649
--- Comment #9 from Gerald Pfeifer 2011-02-09
00:00:58 UTC ---
Actually, let me take this back. This very bug probably should
be closed (I'll address it on the FreeBSD side), but #47648 looks
like a genuine one for Tobias or Jakub?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47649
Gerald Pfeifer changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gerald at pfeifer dot com
--- Comment #8
th-ld=/usr/ccs/bin/ld --enable-shared --with-local-prefix=/opt/gnu64
--prefix=/opt/gnu64/gcc/gcc-4.6.0 --build=hppa64-hp-hpux11.11
--enable-threads=posix --disable-nls --with-gmp=/opt/gnu64/gcc/gcc-4.6.0
--with-libelf=/opt/gnu64 --enable-languages=c,c++,objc,obj-c++,fortran,lto
Thread model: po
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47383
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
URL||http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-p
|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45290
--- Comment #13 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-02-08 23:02:56 UTC ---
With r169948, this PR is basically fixed. Just two minor leftovers:
(1) Making global variables in a program SAVE_IMPLICIT. (Does it even make a
difference?)
(2) We curren
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45290
--- Comment #12 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-02-08 22:51:09 UTC ---
Author: janus
Date: Tue Feb 8 22:51:04 2011
New Revision: 169948
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=169948
Log:
2011-02-08 Janus Weil
PR fortran/
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47637
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|una
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47651
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46159
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||schaub.johannes at
|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47651
Summary: "new (T(*[1]))" is parsed as a functional-cast getting
a lambda-expression
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46752
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
--- Comment #6 from Tobias Burnus 20
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47032
--- Comment #11 from Michael Haubenwallner 2011-02-08 22:14:19 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #10)
> #including math.h and then trying a link test
> should give correct results because it will fail to find __copysignl128 in
> libm
While this is ab
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42368
--- Comment #1 from Joel Sherrill 2011-02-08 21:46:43
UTC ---
Ping on this. Would a patch be OK?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43527
Joel Sherrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47649
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-02-08
21:44:59 UTC ---
BTW, the error mentioned in #c0 doesn't look like from something performed by
make install of gcc itself, are you sure it isn't something that FreeBSD ports
has around gcc make install
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41122
Joel Sherrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47619
--- Comment #12 from H.J. Lu 2011-02-08 21:31:12
UTC ---
(gdb) disass foo
Dump of assembler code for function foo:
0x00400ba4 <+0>:lea-0x4108(%rsp),%r11
0x00400bac <+8>:cmp%fs:0x70,%r11
0x00400bb5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47619
--- Comment #11 from Ian Lance Taylor 2011-02-08 21:29:59
UTC ---
Thanks. Can you also disassemble the start of the function foo in the
executable?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45381
--- Comment #12 from Iain Sandoe 2011-02-08 21:25:05
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #11)
> Yes, a patch like in #1 would be fine.
I will produce one in due course (unless Dominique beats me to it...)
-- the hack below is purely to satisfy curiosi
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47649
--- Comment #6 from Tobias Burnus 2011-02-08
21:18:16 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> I think the important hunk is:
[...]
> which means the ia64 __float128 support is not in a good shape, either just on
> freebsd, but maybe on anything but hp
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47614
--- Comment #9 from Pat Haugen 2011-02-08
21:08:28 UTC ---
Thanks Jakub, check_for_inc_dec() does indeed fix the issue as desired (still
elminates the redundant load, but keeps the increment). I'll fire off
bootstrap/regtest.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47619
--- Comment #10 from H.J. Lu 2011-02-08 21:07:09
UTC ---
[hjl@gnu-6 pr47619]$ cat x.c
#include
#include
void foo( long i )
{
register void* rsp asm( "rsp" );
printf( "i = %ld, rsp = %p\n", i, rsp );
char buf[ 256 ];
memset( bu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47649
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #5 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47032
--- Comment #10 from Peter O'Gorman 2011-02-08
21:03:46 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #9)
> > > > AC_CHECK_LIB([m],[copysignl],[AC_DEFINE([HAVE_COPYSIGNL],[1],\
> > > >[libm includes copysignl])])
> So, for the AC_CHECK_LIB line above, what
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47378
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47378
--- Comment #1 from ian at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-02-08
20:55:07 UTC ---
Author: ian
Date: Tue Feb 8 20:55:02 2011
New Revision: 169946
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=169946
Log:
PR go/47378
Don't use protected visibili
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47032
--- Comment #9 from Steve Kargl
2011-02-08 20:49:04 UTC ---
On Tue, Feb 08, 2011 at 08:43:33PM +, pogma at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> --- Comment #8 from Peter O'Gorman 2011-02-08
> 20:43:18 UTC ---
> (In reply to comment #7)
> > (In reply to
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47032
Peter O'Gorman changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pogma at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #8
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47649
--- Comment #4 from Anton Shterenlikht 2011-02-08
20:25:50 UTC ---
no, I didn't use any configure options,
just a default build from ports.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47642
--- Comment #7 from Jerry DeLisle 2011-02-08
20:25:12 UTC ---
I am OK with using stdio-common/printf_fp.c as well. Also, after the 42 digits
we do not need to go further and can chop it maybe with a few zeros padded. At
least gfortran performas
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47649
--- Comment #3 from Anton Shterenlikht 2011-02-08
20:24:48 UTC ---
Created attachment 23279
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=23279
sparc64 FreeBSD 9.0-current libquadmath config.log
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47649
--- Comment #2 from Anton Shterenlikht 2011-02-08
20:22:30 UTC ---
Created attachment 23278
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=23278
ia64 FreeBSD 9.0-current libquadmath config.log
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47650
--- Comment #5 from joe at mcknight dot de 2011-02-08 20:16:28 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> Well I think you need to debug it to see why it is printing out static, it
> might because a bit on tree has not been set yet.
The static is a very m
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47637
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47650
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski 2011-02-08
20:10:43 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> I am reporting the bug that print_generic_decl() is behaving incorrectly for
> some kinds of declarations. This should either be fixed or a comment be placed
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47650
--- Comment #3 from joe at mcknight dot de 2011-02-08 20:08:51 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> print_generic_decl is designed for debugging reasons only. Any other use is a
> bit bogus. Also asking for help with plugins is not really a bug rep
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39185
Joel Sherrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39184
Joel Sherrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39182
Joel Sherrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35298
Joel Sherrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47324
--- Comment #16 from Jack Howarth 2011-02-08
19:30:46 UTC ---
It is interesting that llvm-gcc42 still uses DWARF2_FRAME_REG_OUT but I don't
see anything like that in clang. Perhaps it would help if we asked about that
issue with the llvm develope
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33803
Joel Sherrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||3.2.3, 4.1.1, 4.2.1, 4.2.2
Known to
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41434
Joel Sherrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14555
Joel Sherrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47442
Joel Sherrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47481
--- Comment #5 from Eric Botcazou 2011-02-08
19:13:37 UTC ---
> Can you commit it?
It needs to be approved by a maintainer of the architecture.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47650
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|c |middle-end
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pin
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47650
--- Comment #1 from joe at mcknight dot de 2011-02-08 19:09:41 UTC ---
here's another example where print_generic_decl() fails:
---
typedef void (*Handler)( int , void * );
Handler GetFunctionPointer();
---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47650
Summary: wrong output of print_generic_decl() called from a
plugin
Product: gcc
Version: 4.5.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47481
--- Comment #4 from Joel Sherrill 2011-02-08 19:02:10
UTC ---
With that patch, i386-rtems now builds.
Can you commit it?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42893
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42893
--- Comment #12 from Jeffrey A. Law 2011-02-08
18:54:21 UTC ---
Author: law
Date: Tue Feb 8 18:54:12 2011
New Revision: 169933
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=169933
Log:
PR tree-optimization/42893
* gcc.tree-ssa/
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47619
--- Comment #9 from Ian Lance Taylor 2011-02-08 18:41:53
UTC ---
I just tried glibc 2.12.2 on Fedora 13 and it worked there too. I don't have a
Fedora 14 system.
This program eats memory and your numbers show it had allocated over 434M when
it
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47649
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47642
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #6
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47243
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47481
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
AssignedTo|ebotcazou at gcc d
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47622
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47649
Summary: install-info: No such file or directory for
/usr/local/info/gcc46/libquadmath.info
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priori
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47648
Summary: libgfortran/libgfortran.h:53:29: fatal error:
quadmath_weak.h: No such f ile or directory - FreeBSD
ia64
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46995
Sebastian Pop changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46994
Sebastian Pop changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46995
--- Comment #3 from Sebastian Pop 2011-02-08 16:54:03
UTC ---
Author: spop
Date: Tue Feb 8 16:53:57 2011
New Revision: 169928
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=169928
Log:
Fix PRs 46834, 46994, and 46995: only rewrite reduct
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46834
Sebastian Pop changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47390
--- Comment #7 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2011-02-08 16:54:19 UTC ---
On Tue, 8 Feb 2011, rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> Hm, I see. The -e LINK_COMMAND_SPEC isn't documented in invoke.texi
> "Link Options", do we generally not do t
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46834
--- Comment #3 from Sebastian Pop 2011-02-08 16:54:04
UTC ---
Author: spop
Date: Tue Feb 8 16:53:57 2011
New Revision: 169928
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=169928
Log:
Fix PRs 46834, 46994, and 46995: only rewrite reduct
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46994
--- Comment #3 from Sebastian Pop 2011-02-08 16:54:03
UTC ---
Author: spop
Date: Tue Feb 8 16:53:57 2011
New Revision: 169928
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=169928
Log:
Fix PRs 46834, 46994, and 46995: only rewrite reduct
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45381
--- Comment #11 from Richard Henderson 2011-02-08
16:52:41 UTC ---
Yes, a patch like in #1 would be fine.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47646
--- Comment #1 from Andreas Krebbel 2011-02-08
16:46:25 UTC ---
Author: krebbel
Date: Tue Feb 8 16:46:20 2011
New Revision: 169927
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=169927
Log:
2011-02-08 Andreas Krebbel
PR middle-en
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45381
--- Comment #10 from Iain Sandoe 2011-02-08 16:44:15
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #9)
> I don't think we really want to pursue this further.
>
> I had hoped to find a solution that satisfied the older apple compiler -- it
> is supposed to suppor
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45381
--- Comment #9 from Richard Henderson 2011-02-08
16:17:10 UTC ---
I don't think we really want to pursue this further.
I had hoped to find a solution that satisfied the older apple compiler -- it
is supposed to support altivec after all -- but i
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47647
Summary: BLOCKs are empty
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: lto
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: debug
AssignedTo: unassig..
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18885
Ludovic Courtès changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ludo at gnu dot org
--- Comment #4 from
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47619
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hjl.tools at gmail dot com
--- Comment #8 from
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47619
--- Comment #7 from Ian Lance Taylor 2011-02-08 15:41:35
UTC ---
Works for me with current mainline gold and eglibc 2.11.1 on Ubuntu Lucid. Can
you show me the -v line from your link command?
1 - 100 of 175 matches
Mail list logo
