http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49923
--- Comment #10 from Søren Holm 2011-08-09 06:37:41 UTC ---
Sweet, but why is it not applied to gcc-4_6-branch ?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50014
--- Comment #3 from irar at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-08-09 06:02:04 UTC ---
Author: irar
Date: Tue Aug 9 06:02:00 2011
New Revision: 177581
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=177581
Log:
PR tree-optimization/50014
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45170
--- Comment #22 from Steve Kargl
2011-08-09 05:09:13 UTC ---
On Tue, Aug 09, 2011 at 04:26:49AM +, damian at rouson dot net wrote:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45170
>
> --- Comment #21 from Damian Rouson 2011-08-09
> 04:2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45170
--- Comment #21 from Damian Rouson 2011-08-09
04:26:45 UTC ---
Thanks but even the version with the "extraneous garbage" was reduced relative
to what I really want to do (which includes making the speaker type abstract
and the speak type-bound pr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50027
Summary: gettext 1.8.11 do not compile for me on freebsd 8.2
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: major
Priority: P3
Component: other
AssignedT
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45170
--- Comment #20 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-08-09 03:48:11 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #19)
> Comment 9 states that gfortran does not yet support "function result variables
> which are character(len=:), pointer". Presumably this also impli
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50026
Summary: [4.7 Regression] Revision 177575 caused many test
failures
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Componen
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49935
Frédéric Buclin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #24955|0 |1
is obsolete|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45170
Damian Rouson changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||damian at rouson dot net
--- Comment #19
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38644
--- Comment #41 from Jiangning Liu 2011-08-09
02:04:52 UTC ---
> Yes, this is from the libstdc++ sources (4.6.1 20110627,
> libstdc++-v3/libsupc++/new_opnt.cc). You need a non-EABI ARM variant of GCC
> since this bug manifestation will only sho
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49935
Frédéric Buclin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #24954|0 |1
is obsolete|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49935
--- Comment #3 from Frédéric Buclin 2011-08-09
01:48:45 UTC ---
Created attachment 24955
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24955
GCC extension for 4.0.2, v1
And here is the GCC extension updated to work with 4.0.2.
I'm now rea
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49935
--- Comment #2 from Frédéric Buclin 2011-08-09
01:47:15 UTC ---
Created attachment 24954
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24954
GCC 4.0.2 patch, v1
Here is the patch which must be applied to the core code of Bugzilla 4.0.2.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50024
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49500
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49246
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Gray 2011-08-09 00:16:20
UTC ---
I was still seeing it about a week or so ago. At the moment I can't even get
past stage1 however. Something seems to go into an infinite loop around
stage 1 in i386-unknown-openbsd5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49992
--- Comment #14 from Jack Howarth 2011-08-09
00:09:08 UTC ---
Iain,
I would also add that when I was trying avoid having to resort to
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-08/msg01583.html, I found that the
linker bug, where duplicate symbols
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49937
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comme
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50025
--- Comment #3 from Andrzej Krzemienski 2011-08-08
23:31:37 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> G++ is actually correct according to wording in the C++11 FDIS (see 8.5.4
> paragraphs 5 and 6), but we've reported it as an issue that needs to be fix
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49990
--- Comment #5 from Vladimir Makarov 2011-08-08
23:18:25 UTC ---
Author: vmakarov
Date: Mon Aug 8 23:18:23 2011
New Revision: 177575
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=177575
Log:
2011-08-08 Vladimir Makarov
PR rtl-op
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50006
--- Comment #5 from dave.anglin at bell dot net 2011-08-08 23:06:08 UTC ---
On 8-Aug-11, at 6:37 PM, danglin at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
Let's try this again.
--
John David Anglindave.ang...@bell.net
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49992
--- Comment #13 from Jack Howarth 2011-08-08
22:59:56 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #12)
> (In reply to comment #10)
> > This is radar://6320843 "duplicate symbols from static libraries not
> > properly
> > ignored" revisiting us...
>
> hm I dou
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50025
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-08-08
22:46:31 UTC ---
It's not just class members, it applies to list-initialization of any reference
type:
int i;
int& ir{ i };
The FDIS requires a temporary to be created, and a non-const referen
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49992
--- Comment #12 from Iain Sandoe 2011-08-08 22:41:32
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #10)
> This is radar://6320843 "duplicate symbols from static libraries not properly
> ignored" revisiting us...
hm I doubt it.
Check the Makefiles for darwin11
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49992
--- Comment #11 from Iain Sandoe 2011-08-08 22:39:31
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #9)
> > It doesn't seem to me to have much to do with lto - it seems a build issue.
> > I.E. one should not be including two different implementations of the
> >
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50025
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-08-08
22:29:08 UTC ---
G++ is actually correct according to wording in the C++11 FDIS (see 8.5.4
paragraphs 5 and 6), but we've reported it as an issue that needs to be fixed.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50006
--- Comment #4 from dave.anglin at bell dot net 2011-08-08 22:13:29 UTC ---
Attached bug box sources. These are from hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.00.
Dave
--
John David Anglindave.ang...@bell.net
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49994
Richard Henderson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|unassigne
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50006
Richard Henderson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50018
Richard Henderson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50025
Summary: C++0x initialization syntax doesn't work for class
members of reference type
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50021
--- Comment #2 from Jan Hubicka 2011-08-08
20:48:51 UTC ---
Yep, we need to mark partial clones and supress warnings there. Do we have way
to work out from DECL if it is a clone? (from callgraph it is bit tricky in
this case when it comes to ltra
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50024
Summary: gcc crashes when using braced initialization in member
function of template
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=5
David Fang changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||fang at csl dot cornell.edu
--- Comment #2 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49992
--- Comment #10 from Jack Howarth 2011-08-08
19:27:58 UTC ---
This is radar://6320843 "duplicate symbols from static libraries not properly
ignored" revisiting us...
26-Oct-2008 10:43 AM Jack Howarth:
Xcode 3.2 fails to link cc1plus-dummy from g
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49992
--- Comment #9 from Dominique d'Humieres 2011-08-08
18:31:02 UTC ---
> It doesn't seem to me to have much to do with lto - it seems a build issue.
> I.E. one should not be including two different implementations of the
> diagnostics on the same
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49992
--- Comment #8 from Iain Sandoe 2011-08-08 18:22:38
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #7)
> > Apparently the key is "--enable-checking=something".
>
> It is even more subtle (x86_64-apple-darwin10):
>
> ../work/configure --prefix=/opt/gcc/gcc4.7w
>
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49990
Kai Tietz changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49990
--- Comment #3 from Kai Tietz 2011-08-08 18:19:20
UTC ---
Author: ktietz
Date: Mon Aug 8 18:19:17 2011
New Revision: 177573
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=177573
Log:
2011-08-08 Richard Henderson
PR middle-end
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49992
--- Comment #7 from Dominique d'Humieres 2011-08-08
18:12:34 UTC ---
> Apparently the key is "--enable-checking=something".
It is even more subtle (x86_64-apple-darwin10):
../work/configure --prefix=/opt/gcc/gcc4.7w
--enable-languages=c,c++,for
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50011
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50020
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49992
--- Comment #6 from Iain Sandoe 2011-08-08 17:57:06
UTC ---
Created attachment 24951
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24951
make errors.c match core-diagnostic.c in the shared interfaces
OK. So Darwin's ld is telling the truth
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49923
--- Comment #9 from Martin Jambor 2011-08-08
17:53:57 UTC ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Mon Aug 8 17:53:55 2011
New Revision: 177572
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=177572
Log:
2011-08-08 Martin Jambor
PR middle-end/49
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49992
--- Comment #5 from Jack Howarth 2011-08-08
17:45:03 UTC ---
We seem to have...
/* Given a partial pathname as input, return another pathname that
shares no directory elements with the pathname of __FILE__. This
is used by fancy_abort()
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49781
--- Comment #37 from Uros Bizjak 2011-08-08 17:16:44
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #35)
> It works much better now. But gcc.dg/torture/pr47744-2.c compiled with
>
> -mx32 -O3 -std=gnu99 -ftree-vectorize -funroll-loops
>
> still generates those l
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50018
--- Comment #3 from Mikael Pettersson 2011-08-08
16:57:17 UTC ---
Created attachment 24950
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24950
reduced test case
The test case is simply that a function takes the address of a __thread
variab
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49781
--- Comment #36 from hjl at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-08-08
16:33:10 UTC ---
Author: hjl
Date: Mon Aug 8 16:33:06 2011
New Revision: 177569
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=177569
Log:
Add a testcase for PR target/49781.
2011-0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49781
--- Comment #35 from H.J. Lu 2011-08-08 16:28:58
UTC ---
It works much better now. But gcc.dg/torture/pr47744-2.c compiled with
-mx32 -O3 -std=gnu99 -ftree-vectorize -funroll-loops
still generates those leal:
leal(%rsi,%r9), %ebp
l
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=4
--- Comment #2 from Ryan Hill 2011-08-08 15:58:33
UTC ---
ie. no backports for graphite work?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48529
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47727
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50020
--- Comment #1 from Jason Merrill 2011-08-08
15:32:27 UTC ---
Author: jason
Date: Mon Aug 8 15:32:21 2011
New Revision: 177567
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=177567
Log:
PR c++/50020
* semantics.c (finish_call_exp
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49993
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Co
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49781
--- Comment #34 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-08-08 14:59:22 UTC ---
Author: uros
Date: Mon Aug 8 14:59:19 2011
New Revision: 177566
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=177566
Log:
PR target/49781
* config/i386/i386.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50020
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|unassigned at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47659
--- Comment #5 from Steve Kargl
2011-08-08 14:50:33 UTC ---
On Mon, Aug 08, 2011 at 06:07:36AM +, thenlich at users dot sourceforge.net
wrote:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47659
>
> --- Comment #4 from Thomas Henlich
> 201
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50011
--- Comment #7 from Jason Merrill 2011-08-08
14:36:27 UTC ---
Author: jason
Date: Mon Aug 8 14:36:22 2011
New Revision: 177565
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=177565
Log:
PR c++/50011
* typeck2.c (check_narrowing):
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48370
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||danny@tu-dortmund.de
--- Comment #1 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50015
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49948
Georg-Johann Lay changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gjl at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #9
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49781
--- Comment #33 from H.J. Lu 2011-08-08 13:34:47
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #32)
> (In reply to comment #31)
> > (In reply to comment #29)
> > > Created attachment 24938 [details]
> > > WIP patch that exploits addr32.
> > >
> > > New version o
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48007
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48007
--- Comment #5 from hjl at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-08-08
13:26:10 UTC ---
Author: hjl
Date: Mon Aug 8 13:26:06 2011
New Revision: 177563
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=177563
Log:
Fix Dwarf unwind library for UNITS_PER_WORD
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50006
--- Comment #2 from John David Anglin 2011-08-08
13:25:41 UTC ---
(gdb) p debug_tree (fndecl)
unit size
align 64 symtab 98 alias set 53 canonical type 7aea64e0 fields
Ada size
pointer_to_this chain >
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50023
Summary: FAIL: gcc.dg/graphite/id-pr46845.c (test for excess
errors)
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compone
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50016
PcX changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||4.7.0
--- Comment #10 from PcX 2011-08-08 13:01:58
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50006
--- Comment #1 from John David Anglin 2011-08-08
13:01:14 UTC ---
(gdb) ignor 1 79
Will ignore next 79 crossings of breakpoint 1.
(gdb) r
Starting program: /home/gnu/gcc/objdir/gcc/gnat1 -gnatwa -quiet -dumpbase
s-os_lib.adb -auxbase-strip s-os_l
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50016
--- Comment #9 from PcX 2011-08-08 12:38:11 UTC
---
CC list add Kai.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50016
--- Comment #8 from PcX 2011-08-08 12:35:12 UTC
---
(In reply to comment #7)
> (In reply to comment #6)
> > Maybe this is MingW specific?
> >
> > I haven't tested this, but here goes my guess:
> >
> > Since in the write loop we're jumping back
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50014
Ira Rosen changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50016
--- Comment #7 from PcX 2011-08-08 12:05:47 UTC
---
(In reply to comment #6)
> Maybe this is MingW specific?
>
> I haven't tested this, but here goes my guess:
>
> Since in the write loop we're jumping back and forth across the file, the
> buf
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50016
Janne Blomqvist changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jb at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #6 fr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49946
--- Comment #2 from Igor Zamyatin 2011-08-08
11:35:32 UTC ---
cunrolli does not handle the loop in the testcase because of the condition "ul
== UL_NO_GROWTH && unr_insns > ninsns" in try_unroll_loop_completely. Meanwhile
may_increase_size is true
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48648
kiloalphaindia changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kilo at stierand dot com
--- Comment #13
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50011
--- Comment #6 from Marc Glisse 2011-08-08
11:14:06 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> It gives a warning probably because of a mistake in the gcc sources.
Or not. In your example, remove short and replace int with long. Now you are
asking for a
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50011
--- Comment #5 from Zdenek Sojka 2011-08-08 11:03:29
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> + if ((TYPE_PRECISION (type) < TYPE_PRECISION (ftype)
> + || TYPE_UNSIGNED (type) != TYPE_UNSIGNED (ftype))
>
> looks wrong. I guess it should be
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50022
--- Comment #1 from Mike Hommey 2011-08-08
10:44:27 UTC ---
Created attachment 24949
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24949
nsCookieService.i.xz
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49993
--- Comment #1 from Arnaud Desitter
2011-08-08 10:28:27 UTC ---
The equivalent "C" program results in the expected "segmentation fault".
void a1(int *ia) {
*ia = 1;
}
void a2(void) {
static const int ia[] = { 2 };
a1(ia);
}
int main(void)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50022
Summary: [4.7 regression] "incorrect condition in IT block"
when building mozilla code base for ARM
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50021
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Keywords|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50011
--- Comment #4 from Marc Glisse 2011-08-08
10:12:58 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> Yes, I should have mentioned the target is x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu.
> Generally, the code added in r177215:
>
> + if ((TYPE_PRECISION (type) < TYPE_PREC
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49987
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50012
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
Target Milestone|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50011
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49246
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49242
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50018
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.7.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50014
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50005
--- Comment #4 from Richard Guenther 2011-08-08
09:59:05 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Aug 8 09:59:02 2011
New Revision: 177557
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=177557
Log:
2011-08-08 Mikael Pettersson
PR tr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50005
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50009
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50008
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.7.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50007
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50006
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.7.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50004
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.7.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=4
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49998
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.7.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49991
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49997
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
1 - 100 of 107 matches
Mail list logo
