http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50641
--- Comment #4 from Andy Lutomirski 2011-10-07 06:57:01
UTC ---
The problem I encountered that inspired this was:
#include
#include
struct From
{
};
struct To
{
To(const From &&) {}
To(const To &) = delete;
void operator = (const To &)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50641
--- Comment #3 from Daniel Krügler
2011-10-07 06:46:56 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> This looks like not-a-bug to me.
This refers to the traits implementation. I believe that the core language
should consider to remove the need for the temp
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50603
--- Comment #7 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-10-07 06:43:24 UTC ---
Author: uros
Date: Fri Oct 7 06:43:17 2011
New Revision: 179646
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=179646
Log:
PR target/50603
* config/i386/i386.c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50302
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|NEW
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44463
--- Comment #12 from Andi Kleen 2011-10-07
05:52:08 UTC ---
Honza, I think that is fixed now, correct?
I should probably drop my workarounds but haven't yet
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50647
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|c |other
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50302
Andi Kleen changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50511
Andi Kleen changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50636
--- Comment #7 from Andi Kleen 2011-10-07
05:50:40 UTC ---
*** Bug 50511 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49282
Andi Kleen changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50636
--- Comment #6 from Andi Kleen 2011-10-07
05:47:54 UTC ---
*** Bug 50302 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45475
Andi Kleen changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46905
Andi Kleen changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44992
Andi Kleen changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50641
--- Comment #2 from Daniel Krügler
2011-10-07 05:36:02 UTC ---
1) The outcome of is_constructible is expected, because you cannot construct
From from To, the actually wanted test would have been
static_assert(std::is_constructible::value, "not
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47836
Roger Meyer changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||fzvqedi at v dot
|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48825
--- Comment #11 from Roger Meyer 2011-10-07
03:21:12 UTC ---
the actual problem leading to this is that the check for psignal doesn't
include the proper feature-test macros
to cite the manpage
SYNOPSIS
#include
void psignal(int
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48825
Roger Meyer changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||fzvqedi at v dot
|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50648
Bug #: 50648
Summary: --disable-shared is not passed on to target-zlib
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.5.3
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
P
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50647
Bug #: 50647
Summary: gcc/system.h: wrong prototype for sbrk
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.5.3
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43290
--- Comment #22 from Ryan Hill 2011-10-07
01:37:51 UTC ---
And now 4.4.6.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49561
--- Comment #10 from Paolo Carlini 2011-10-07
01:37:34 UTC ---
I can confirm it was just luck, really.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49561
--- Comment #9 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-10-07
01:36:02 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #8)
> I guess it will now be dangerous to even load a shared lib compiled with
> --std=c++0x into the same executable as C++ code compiled in the default c++03
>
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50646
Bug #: 50646
Summary: configure detects big endian on little endian system.
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.5.3
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49561
foom at fuhm dot net changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||foom at fuhm dot net
--- Comment #8
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50645
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50642
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-10-07
00:49:31 UTC ---
I think this PR is valid, I don't see why the fixed-width text has to be so
small. I *can* read it at that size, but I'd prefer if it was the same size as
the text in a proportional
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49818
Benjamin Kosnik changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bkoz at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50645
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-10-07
00:44:12 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> but LOGICALLY you don't want I warning when passing a string literal to a
> char*
> parameter in a function.
Yes you do. A string literal is immutable. A
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50645
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-10-07
00:41:25 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #0)
>
> If I declare:
>
> const char*DowNames[] = {
> "Sun", "Mon", "Tue", "Wed", "Thu", "Fri", "Sat", "Sun",
> NULL
> };
>
> as just
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50638
--- Comment #2 from Hans-Peter Nilsson 2011-10-07
00:39:03 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> For cris-elf too, another emutls target.
> The full build-gcc.sh regression list for cris-elf at r179625 (last known
> working at r179611):
Sorry, I fo
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50645
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski 2011-10-07
00:37:40 UTC ---
IIRC it was the C standard which declared it as deprecated.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50645
--- Comment #1 from mike.c at rocketime dot com 2011-10-07 00:35:20 UTC ---
The quick fix:
#pragma GCC diagnostic ignored "-Wwrite-strings"
... of course eliminates the warnings -- but logically, you DO WANT A WARNING
when you should be declaring
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50638
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49752
Richard Henderson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50642
--- Comment #1 from Paolo Carlini 2011-10-07
00:21:00 UTC ---
I must say, I have been using Firefox on Linux exclusively for years, and
years, and never had this issue with my normal setup in terms of font size (the
same I use for, I don't know,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50645
Bug #: 50645
Summary: old issue - deprecated conversion from string to char*
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50644
Andi Kleen changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||matz at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1 from
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50641
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||daniel.kruegler at
|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50644
Bug #: 50644
Summary: ICE in set_is_used added today
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50006
Richard Henderson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50632
Richard Henderson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50132
Richard Henderson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50632
--- Comment #4 from Richard Henderson 2011-10-06
22:22:15 UTC ---
Author: rth
Date: Thu Oct 6 22:22:11 2011
New Revision: 179637
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=179637
Log:
PR 50632
* combine-stack-adjust.c (maybe
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50625
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|una
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50643
Bug #: 50643
Summary: Suppress cc1: warnings being treated as errors
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.5.4
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pri
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50642
Bug #: 50642
Summary: onlinedocs formated text too small to read
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prior
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49801
Richard Henderson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #25430|0 |1
is obsolete|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50641
Bug #: 50641
Summary: [c++0x] is_convertible and is_constructible
incorrectly require copy constructibility
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
S
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50636
--- Comment #5 from Andi Kleen 2011-10-06
21:46:32 UTC ---
If it's a 2MB page then madvise MADV_DONTNEED will split it if it's not
2MB aligned. It would be good to optimize the freeing pattern so that this
happens
rarely.
I will try to do some n
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50636
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-10-06
21:41:41 UTC ---
Right now alloc_page will (usually) allocate in GGC_QUIRE_SIZE * G.pagesize
chunks, but release_pages will munmap individual pages immediately during
collection (well, using one munmap
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50640
--- Comment #1 from Dominique d'Humieres 2011-10-06
21:38:36 UTC ---
Backtrace
Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
mark_all_vars_used_1 (tp=, walk_subtrees=, data=)
at ../../work/gcc/tree-flow-inline.h:562
562 ann->used
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49801
Richard Henderson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50636
--- Comment #3 from Andi Kleen 2011-10-06
21:31:56 UTC ---
I would prefer to free in 2MB chunks if possible
I was experimenting with increasing the quire size from 1 to 2MB so that a
modern
kernel with transparent huge pages can always get a hug
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50636
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50625
--- Comment #3 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-10-06 21:27:50 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> However, with this patch, the test case gives me a different error:
>
> internal compiler error: in gfc_conv_component_ref, at
> fortran/trans-exp
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50640
Bug #: 50640
Summary: [4.7 Regression] FAIL: gfortran.dg/select_type_12.f03
-O (internal compiler error)
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Sta
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50639
Bug #: 50639
Summary: -flto=jobserver broken on large LTO build
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50394
--- Comment #27 from Jan Hubicka 2011-10-06
20:51:50 UTC ---
OK, disabling Java gets me further now, but I now get an abort at:
jh@evans:/abuild/jh/libreoffice/core> more
./workdir/unxlngx6.pro/CppunitTest/comphelper_test.test.log
terminate call
languages)of emulated TLS tests fail/problem
exposed from r179618
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2011-10/msg00212.html
---
e.g.
FAIL: gcc.dg/tls/nonpic-1.c (internal compiler error)
GNU C (GCC) version 4.7.0 20111006 (experimental) [trunk revision 179619]
(i686-apple-darwin9
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50633
--- Comment #10 from H.J. Lu 2011-10-06 20:09:13
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #9)
> Created attachment 25434 [details]
> Test patch
>
> Can you give this a try? Seems to fix the testcase.
It works. Thanks.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50633
--- Comment #9 from Bernd Schmidt 2011-10-06
19:59:18 UTC ---
Created attachment 25434
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25434
Test patch
Can you give this a try? Seems to fix the testcase.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39164
--- Comment #3 from Jason Merrill 2011-10-06
19:57:06 UTC ---
Author: jason
Date: Thu Oct 6 19:56:53 2011
New Revision: 179634
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=179634
Log:
PR c++/39164
* decl.c (grokfndecl): Diagnos
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49279
--- Comment #16 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-10-06
19:56:40 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Oct 6 19:56:32 2011
New Revision: 179633
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=179633
Log:
PR tree-optimization/49279
* tree-ssa-stru
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50603
--- Comment #6 from H.J. Lu 2011-10-06 19:44:06
UTC ---
It doesn't work since we fail to decompose subreg.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50603
--- Comment #5 from H.J. Lu 2011-10-06 19:37:56
UTC ---
Taking from combine.c:
else if (GET_CODE (t) == ZERO_EXTEND
&& (GET_CODE (XEXP (t, 0)) == PLUS
|| GET_CODE (XEXP (t, 0)) == IOR
||
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50636
--- Comment #1 from Jan Hubicka 2011-10-06 19:20:45 UTC
---
> When doing a very large LTO build I fail with "out of virtual memory"
>
> Some investigation showed the problem was not actually running out of
> memory, but gcc excessively fragment
> When doing a very large LTO build I fail with "out of virtual memory"
>
> Some investigation showed the problem was not actually running out of
> memory, but gcc excessively fragmenting its memory map. The Linux kernel
> has a default limit of 64k mappings per process and the fragmentation
> e
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50603
--- Comment #4 from H.J. Lu 2011-10-06 19:19:23
UTC ---
Combine failed:
(set (mem:SI (and:DI (plus:DI (subreg:DI (mult:SI (reg/v:SI 84 [ i ])
(const_int 4 [0x4])) 0)
(subreg:DI (reg:SI 106) 0))
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50632
--- Comment #3 from Richard Henderson 2011-10-06
19:15:48 UTC ---
Created attachment 25433
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25433
proposed patch
Testing this patch now.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50635
Ira Rosen changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50632
Richard Henderson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50603
--- Comment #3 from H.J. Lu 2011-10-06 19:00:54
UTC ---
[hjl@gnu-mic-2 pr50633]$ cat x.i
struct s { int val[16]; };
extern double f (struct s pb, double pc);
int main ()
{
struct s x;
int i;
for (i = 0; i < 16; i++)
x.val[i] = i + 1;
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50633
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.7.0
--- Comment #8 from H.J. Lu 2011-10-06 1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50633
--- Comment #7 from H.J. Lu 2011-10-06 18:50:14
UTC ---
This patch seems to work:
diff --git a/gcc/function.c b/gcc/function.c
index 863f09d..0bc1dd9 100644
--- a/gcc/function.c
+++ b/gcc/function.c
@@ -5312,6 +5312,21 @@ frame_required_for_rtx
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50633
--- Comment #6 from Bernd Schmidt 2011-10-06
18:43:21 UTC ---
How do you build this? What's the target triplet?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50633
--- Comment #5 from H.J. Lu 2011-10-06 18:38:21
UTC ---
static int
frame_required_for_rtx (rtx *loc, void *data ATTRIBUTE_UNUSED)
{
rtx x = *loc;
if (x == stack_pointer_rtx || x == hard_frame_pointer_rtx
|| x == arg_pointer_rtx || x ==
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50637
Bug #: 50637
Summary: gcc.dg/vect/vect-align-2.c is invalid (FAILs with -O2
-flto -fpeel-loops)
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCON
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50628
--- Comment #8 from Dominique d'Humieres 2011-10-06
18:28:00 UTC ---
> There is certainly a typo in one of the reported revisions.
Yes, it is 179556.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50636
Bug #: 50636
Summary: GC in large LTO builds cause excessive fragmentation
in memory map
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50628
Mikael Morin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mikael at gcc dot gnu.org
Summa
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50628
Mikael Morin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hjl.tools at gmail dot com
--- Comment #6
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50634
Mikael Morin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50635
--- Comment #2 from Greta Yorsh 2011-10-06
18:09:51 UTC ---
Created attachment 25432
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25432
small testcase for ice on valid code
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50635
--- Comment #1 from Greta Yorsh 2011-10-06
18:08:25 UTC ---
In fact, it's ICE on valid - see the testcase small_ice_init.c. The command
line and backtrace are the same.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50633
--- Comment #4 from H.J. Lu 2011-10-06 17:55:48
UTC ---
Here is a small testcase. shrink-wrap screwed up stack adjustment
for local variables:
[hjl@gnu-mic-2 pr50633]$ cat x.i
struct s { int val[16]; };
extern double f (struct s pb, double pc);
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50596
--- Comment #12 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-10-06
17:49:43 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Oct 6 17:49:36 2011
New Revision: 179626
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=179626
Log:
PR tree-optimization/50596
* tree-vectoriz
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50633
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bernds at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3 from H
Hi Guys,
I am stuck on a dataflow problem. PR 49801 is reported against the RX
toolchain, but I believe it to be a generic problem.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49801
The issue I think is the split2 pass which is converting this:
(set (pc) (if_then_else (geu (reg r
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50635
Bug #: 50635
Summary: ICE on invalid code: segfault in vectorize_loops
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
P
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50634
Bug #: 50634
Summary: [4.7 Regression] FAIL:
gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/entry_4.f90
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50632
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bernds at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1 from H
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49279
--- Comment #15 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-10-06
16:38:35 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Oct 6 16:38:29 2011
New Revision: 179620
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=179620
Log:
PR tree-optimization/49279
* tree-ssa-stru
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50633
--- Comment #2 from Dominique d'Humieres 2011-10-06
16:23:37 UTC ---
> FAIL: gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/entry_4.f90 execution, -O2
It is pr50628.
> FAIL: gcc.dg/pr50132.c (internal compiler error)
The ICE is
/opt/gcc/work/gcc/testsuit
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49317
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.7.0
--- Comment #2 from Rainer Orth 2011
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50633
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ro at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1 from R
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50633
Bug #: 50633
Summary: [4.7 Regression] New test failures
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50632
Bug #: 50632
Summary: [4.7 Regression] New test failures
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50125
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
URL|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50631
Bug #: 50631
Summary: g++.dg/bprob/g++-bprob-2.C -fbranch-probabilities
FAILs on Tru64 UNIX
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRM
1 - 100 of 140 matches
Mail list logo
