http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50845
--- Comment #1 from lsching17 at gmail dot com 2011-10-25 05:47:16 UTC ---
Created attachment 25609
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25609
result of command "gcj -v"
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50844
--- Comment #3 from lsching17 at gmail dot com 2011-10-25 05:46:27 UTC ---
Created attachment 25608
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25608
result of command "gcj -v"
x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
Configured with: ../current-gcc/configure --prefix=/home/cas43/new-gcc/inst
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.7.0 20111024 (experimental) (GCC)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50693
--- Comment #23 from Alexandre Oliva 2011-10-25
04:48:24 UTC ---
Yup. We don't even need a new debug stmt type, methinks. Say, emit the debug
stmt with the LABEL_DECL, decay that to a debug stmt in cfgexpand, and turn
that into a NOTE_INSN_DELE
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50770
--- Comment #2 from Alexandre Oliva 2011-10-25
04:38:34 UTC ---
Michael, please fill in the target and any other configure options you used,
and attach a preprocessed version of the source that exposes the problem, if
the patch in r180194 didn't
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50826
--- Comment #6 from Alexandre Oliva 2011-10-25
04:14:15 UTC ---
Steve, forgot to ask you to give the latest patch a try and let me know how it
goes. I'm not sure yet why we don't trigger this problem on x86*. TIA,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50826
Alexandre Oliva changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #25605|0 |1
is obsolete|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50826
--- Comment #4 from Alexandre Oliva 2011-10-25
04:05:05 UTC ---
Created attachment 25605
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25605
Patch that restores earlier behavior, hiding the problem
This patch restores the cselib/vta expans
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50816
--- Comment #11 from Anitha Boyapati
2011-10-25 02:33:50 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #8)
> (In reply to comment #7)
> > Compile it as:
> >
> > $avr-gcc -mmcu=atxmega128a1 -g -gdwarf-2 test.c -S
>
> You are left alone with that: -mmcu=atxmega12
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50816
--- Comment #10 from Anitha Boyapati
2011-10-25 02:31:12 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #9)
> Author: jakub
> Date: Mon Oct 24 18:09:21 2011
> New Revision: 180398
>
> URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=180398
> Log:
> PR de
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50826
Alexandre Oliva changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50837
--- Comment #2 from Paolo Carlini 2011-10-25
01:10:59 UTC ---
I can't believe it's so easy: fixes the testcase and passes the testsuite
(modulo a trivial tweak to a dg-error string):
Index: cp/pt.c
===
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50858
--- Comment #8 from Paolo Carlini 2011-10-25
00:55:26 UTC ---
This patchlet avoids the ICE and passes the testsuite:
Index: typeck.c
===
--- typeck.c(revision 180413)
+++ typeck
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50837
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50860
--- Comment #3 from lsching17 at gmail dot com 2011-10-25 00:16:13 UTC ---
Created attachment 25604
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25604
compile linux x64 executable (by gcj 4.5.2)
--main=net_server_main -pipe -O2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50860
lsching17 at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #25602|0 |1
is obsolete|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50860
--- Comment #1 from lsching17 at gmail dot com 2011-10-25 00:12:29 UTC ---
Created attachment 25602
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25602
gcj -v
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50860
Bug #: 50860
Summary: Unexpected NullPointerException when create simple
class
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.5.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50859
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49855
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bitbucket at mailinator dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50859
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Status|UN
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50858
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-invalid-code
CC|pa
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50859
Bug #: 50859
Summary: ICE when creating integral constant from real value in
a template
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49894
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49894
--- Comment #10 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-10-24
23:26:29 UTC ---
Author: redi
Date: Mon Oct 24 23:26:25 2011
New Revision: 180411
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=180411
Log:
PR libstdc++/49894
* include/std/mutex (_
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50858
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50751
--- Comment #5 from Kazumoto Kojima 2011-10-24
23:05:08 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #4)
It seems that clobbering R0 in that expander is simply papering
over the real problem. Although the reload issue beyonds me,
.ira dump file about that impos
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50182
--- Comment #25 from davidxl 2011-10-24 23:02:14
UTC ---
Created attachment 25600
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25600
test case for 47
Note that with gcc46, the result is even slower -- it has the RAT stall problem
which
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50182
--- Comment #24 from davidxl 2011-10-24 23:00:22
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #23)
> Here is the source preprocessed for gcc47. The test exhibits the
> slowdown mentioned in comment 11.
The problem can be reproduced with a simplified test case
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50858
--- Comment #5 from Paolo Carlini 2011-10-24
21:31:39 UTC ---
I see, at the moment I don't have my machines at hand, sorry for not noticing.
Anyway, let me double check isn't something trivial and then we'll resolve the
issue.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50858
--- Comment #4 from Markus Trippelsdorf
2011-10-24 21:23:35 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> What do you mean by 'probably'? Did you bisect this?
By probably I mean looking at the backtrace and running
git-blame starting from the top entry. T
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50858
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50182
--- Comment #23 from oleg at smolsky dot net 2011-10-24 21:11:21 UTC ---
Here is the source preprocessed for gcc47. The test exhibits the
slowdown mentioned in comment 11.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50858
--- Comment #2 from Paolo Carlini 2011-10-24
20:57:27 UTC ---
What do you mean by 'probably'? Did you bisect this? Anyway, if it's really my
patch, please confirm, no problem reverting it and reopening, didn't fix a
regression, can wait.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50823
--- Comment #3 from Dmitry Gorbachev
2011-10-24 20:10:12 UTC ---
Created attachment 25598
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25598
Another testcase
Compile it with `gcc -O3 -flto -nostdlib -r foobar.c baz.c'.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50182
--- Comment #22 from davidxl 2011-10-24 19:58:23
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #21)
> OK, just in case, here is my current test.
Preprocessed test case? I saw the main assembly difference that can explain the
performance diff, but want to make su
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50182
--- Comment #21 from oleg at smolsky dot net 2011-10-24 19:48:57 UTC ---
OK, just in case, here is my current test.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50196
--- Comment #9 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-10-24
19:33:32 UTC ---
I'm not sure if these failures are due to PR 50598:
FAIL: 30_threads/thread/native_handle/typesizes.cc execution test
FAIL: ext/mt_allocator/deallocate_global_thread-1.cc execution
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50182
--- Comment #20 from davidxl 2011-10-24 19:33:18
UTC ---
The test.cpp attached seems to be the same as the old version.
David
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50858
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||paolo.carlini at oracle dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50182
--- Comment #19 from oleg at smolsky dot net 2011-10-24 18:33:23 UTC ---
Also note that Bugzilla has quietly replaced an older attachment,
test.cpp, with a new one without adding a comment...
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50858
Bug #: 50858
Summary: [4.7 Regression] segfault at
../../gcc/libiberty/hashtab.c:981
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50182
--- Comment #17 from oleg at smolsky dot net 2011-10-24 18:27:31 UTC ---
Created attachment 25595
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25595
test.cpp.144t.optimized
--- Comment #18 from oleg at smolsky dot net 2011-10-24 18:27:31 UT
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50182
--- Comment #16 from oleg at smolsky dot net 2011-10-24 18:27:28 UTC ---
$ /work/tools/gcc47/bin/g++ -v
Using built-in specs.
COLLECT_GCC=/work/tools/gcc47/bin/g++
COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/work/tools/gcc47/libexec/gcc/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/4.7.0/lto
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50816
--- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-10-24
18:09:24 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Mon Oct 24 18:09:21 2011
New Revision: 180398
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=180398
Log:
PR debug/50816
* dwarf2out.c (dwarf2out_sou
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50850
--- Comment #1 from Serge Belyshev
2011-10-24 17:57:09 UTC ---
Most likely dup of bug 50763 (see if reverting r180341 or applying patch from
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50763#c12 helps).
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50731
--- Comment #4 from Uros Bizjak 2011-10-24 17:39:09
UTC ---
Revision 179958 FAILs.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50843
Uros Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rth at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4 from
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50856
Richard Earnshaw changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||arm
Priority|P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50843
--- Comment #3 from Diego Novillo 2011-10-24
17:07:54 UTC ---
This was working as of trunk rev 178998.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50857
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ian at airs dot com
--- Comment #1 fro
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50857
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.7.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50857
Bug #: 50857
Summary: [4.7 Regression] The compiler is built with exceptions
and RTTI enabled
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFI
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50820
Georg-Johann Lay changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49824
Georg-Johann Lay changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49824
--- Comment #3 from Georg-Johann Lay 2011-10-24
14:55:53 UTC ---
Author: gjl
Date: Mon Oct 24 14:55:45 2011
New Revision: 180390
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=180390
Log:
PR target/49824
Backport from mainline r18
ve eliminated.
rsb r0, r1, r0
cmp r0, #0
rsblt r0, r0, #0
bx lr
.size absolute_difference2, .-absolute_difference2
.ident "GCC: (GNU) 4.7.0 20111024 (experimental)"
.section.note.GNU-stack,"",%progbits
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50820
--- Comment #4 from Georg-Johann Lay 2011-10-24
14:49:55 UTC ---
Author: gjl
Date: Mon Oct 24 14:49:47 2011
New Revision: 180388
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=180388
Log:
PR target/50820
Port from 4.6 branch r1803
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49824
--- Comment #2 from Georg-Johann Lay 2011-10-24
14:46:02 UTC ---
Author: gjl
Date: Mon Oct 24 14:45:51 2011
New Revision: 180385
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=180385
Log:
PR target/49824
* doc/extend.texi (Declari
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28854
--- Comment #5 from Uros Bizjak 2011-10-24 14:44:49
UTC ---
Just FYI, this is due to the fact that _start from /usr/crt1.o has a FDE:
$ objdump --dwarf /usr/lib/crt1.o
/usr/lib/crt1.o: file format elf64-alpha
Contents of the .eh_frame se
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50848
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-invalid-code
Status|UN
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50853
--- Comment #8 from Alisdair Meredith 2011-10-24
14:27:18 UTC ---
I am happy with closed - the ICE is resolved an PR50855 reports the
unimplemented error message, with (hopefully) a simpler test case.
It might be worth re-testing once PR50855 is
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50853
--- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-10-24
14:22:51 UTC ---
actually, I guess I was a bit hasty closing it ... there's no ICE but it still
fails to compile - should we reopen?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50853
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Known to work|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50855
--- Comment #3 from Alisdair Meredith 2011-10-24
14:13:31 UTC ---
And just to confirm - it sounds like the ICE in PR50853 is a bad compiler at my
end. I suggest keeping *this* PR open, as at least it reports the correct
error!
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50853
--- Comment #5 from Alisdair Meredith 2011-10-24
14:10:38 UTC ---
Using built-in specs.
COLLECT_GCC=gcc-mp-4.6
COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/opt/local/libexec/gcc/x86_64-apple-darwin10/4.6.1/lto-wrapper
Target: x86_64-apple-darwin10
Configured with: ../gc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50855
--- Comment #2 from Alisdair Meredith 2011-10-24
14:06:55 UTC ---
It might be. I still see an ICE for PR50853, but if that is giving the same
error now, then it is probably the same root cause. I'm still waiting to hear
if I have an issue with
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50853
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-10-24
14:06:26 UTC ---
The 4.6.1 release and trunk both give the error I quoted.
What does 'gcc -v' show for your compiler?
(that info should be in the report anyway! ;)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50852
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-invalid-code
Status|UN
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50853
--- Comment #3 from Alisdair Meredith 2011-10-24
14:02:22 UTC ---
The original report was compiled with gcc 4.6.1 supplied by MacPorts. Could
you confirm if the not-supported error message occurs in trunk, or a separately
compiled gcc 4.6.1?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50855
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org
Summa
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50855
Bug #: 50855
Summary: Name mangling for late return types invoking
constructors not implemented
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.1
Status: UNCON
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50854
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org |
Component|c++
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50850
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|c |tree-optimization
Target Milestone|-
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50851
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|c++ |tree-optimization
Target Milestone|-
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50851
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50853
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|Internal Compiler Error |[C++0x] Internal Compiler
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50854
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50853
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-10-24
13:25:25 UTC ---
I get: sorry, unimplemented: mangling constructor
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50838
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
12-1.25.el6_1.3.x86_64
> g++ -v
Using built-in specs.
COLLECT_GCC=g++
COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/app2/gcc/4.7.0-20111024-svn180364/i686/libexec/gcc/i686-unknown-linux-gnu/4.7.0/lto-wrapper
Target: i686-unknown-linux-gnu
Configured with: ./configure --prefix=/app2/gcc/4.7.0-20111024-svn180364/i686
--enable-languages=c,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50836
Mikael Pettersson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38644
--- Comment #53 from Sebastian Huber
2011-10-24 13:06:03 UTC ---
I tested the above patch proposed by Mikael Pettersson (from 2010-05-26, more
than one year ago) with GCC 4.6 20111021. It still fixes the test case
provided by Dave Murphy (from 2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50853
Bug #: 50853
Summary: Internal Compiler Error returning a template type
using brace initialization
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.1
Status: UN
x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
Configured with: ../current-gcc/configure --prefix=/home/cas43/new-gcc/inst
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.7.0 20111024 (experimental) (GCC)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50810
--- Comment #18 from Manuel López-Ibáñez 2011-10-24
12:35:49 UTC ---
Paolo, I am sorry to say it so bluntly but this solution is nonsense:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-10/msg02160.html
I know it is what Gabriel requested, but it doesn
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50838
--- Comment #3 from Richard Guenther 2011-10-24
12:31:06 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Oct 24 12:31:01 2011
New Revision: 180381
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=180381
Log:
2011-10-24 Richard Guenther
PR tree-op
x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
Configured with: ../current-gcc/configure --prefix=/home/cas43/new-gcc/inst
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.7.0 20111024 (experimental) (GCC)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50820
--- Comment #3 from Georg-Johann Lay 2011-10-24
12:22:25 UTC ---
Author: gjl
Date: Mon Oct 24 12:22:21 2011
New Revision: 180379
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=180379
Log:
PR target/50820
* doc/invoke.texi (AVR Opt
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50686
--- Comment #19 from Bernd Schmidt 2011-10-24
12:10:21 UTC ---
It's really hard to run a gdb session this way. You're not a gcc newbie, and
you're the only one with an IRIX machine - can you not debug a bit further from
where we are now? You'll h
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50763
--- Comment #12 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-10-24 12:06:19 UTC ---
Created attachment 25590
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25590
proposed patch for problem reported in comment 10
2011-10-24 Tom de Vries
PR tree-
gcc version: 4.7.0 20111024 (experimental) (GCC)
uname -a: Linux koplaix 3.1.0-rc10+ #3 SMP Sat Oct 22 19:22:40 EDT 2011
x86_64 GNU/Linux
Bug Info
compiler output:
fs/gfs2/file.c: In function ‘gfs2_set_inode_flags’:
fs/gfs2/file.c:172:6: error: definition in block 3 does not domin
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50849
vincenzo Innocente changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50816
--- Comment #8 from Georg-Johann Lay 2011-10-24
11:53:16 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #7)
> Compile it as:
>
> $avr-gcc -mmcu=atxmega128a1 -g -gdwarf-2 test.c -S
You are left alone with that: -mmcu=atxmega128a1 is not supported.
See avr-gcc --
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50833
--- Comment #1 from Bernd Schmidt 2011-10-24
11:46:09 UTC ---
Author: bernds
Date: Mon Oct 24 11:46:04 2011
New Revision: 180377
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=180377
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/50833
* function.c (th
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50686
--- Comment #18 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE 2011-10-24 11:43:38 UTC ---
Bernd,
could you make some progress on this PR? IRIX bootstrap is broken for
more than two weeks now.
Thanks.
Rainer
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50849
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50836
--- Comment #2 from Bernd Schmidt 2011-10-24
11:03:16 UTC ---
Author: bernds
Date: Mon Oct 24 11:03:12 2011
New Revision: 180376
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=180376
Log:
PR bootstrap/50836
* rtlanal.c: Swap inclu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50763
vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|ASSIGNED
Resolution|FIX
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50763
Serge Belyshev changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||belyshev at depni dot
1 - 100 of 114 matches
Mail list logo