http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58295
--- Comment #11 from Eric Botcazou ---
> So why don't reject it at
> TARGET_LEGITIMATE_COMBINED_INSN/ix86_legitimate_combined_insn
> instead of limit at combine phase if it's only benefit for x86 ?
The question sounds self-contradictory... Anywa
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57662
--- Comment #6 from Andrey Belevantsev ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #5)
> Fixed according to
>
> 2013-08-14 Andrey Belevantsev
>
> PR rtl-optimization/57662
> * sel-sched.c (code_motion_process_successors): Whe
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58934
Bug ID: 58934
Summary: [4.9 Regression]: build fails on cris-elf in
reload_cse_simplify_operands for newlib dtoa.c
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58295
Kito Cheng changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||npickito at gmail dot com
--- Comment #10 fr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58933
--- Comment #2 from Vladimir Makarov ---
Author: vmakarov
Date: Thu Oct 31 03:14:07 2013
New Revision: 204245
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=204245&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2013-10-30 Vladimir Makarov
PR bootstrap/58933
* ira-color
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58134
--- Comment #6 from Sharad Singhai ---
Author: singhai
Date: Thu Oct 31 01:01:40 2013
New Revision: 204244
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=204244&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2013-10-30 Sharad Singhai
PR middle-end/58134
* opts.c (commo
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58762
--- Comment #3 from congh at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: congh
Date: Thu Oct 31 00:50:47 2013
New Revision: 204241
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=204241&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2013-10-30 Cong Hou
Backport from mainline:
2013-10-30
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52121
nicolas.boulenguez at free dot fr changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nicolas.boulenguez at f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43361
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||noufal at nibrahim dot net.in
--- C
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58236
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||manu at gcc dot gnu.org
Res
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52120
--- Comment #2 from nicolas.boulenguez at free dot fr ---
4.8.2-1 produces the expected output for the last trigger
gcc-4.8 -c proc.adb
proc.adb:9:10: iterator is an Ada 2012 feature
gnatmake: "proc.adb" compilation error
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58545
--- Comment #5 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke ---
Author: amylaar
Date: Wed Oct 30 23:55:46 2013
New Revision: 204234
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=204234&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
gcc:
PR other/58545
* reload1.c (update_eliminabl
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58915
--- Comment #2 from Cong Hou ---
I am afraid that get_range_info () has little use here. The value range we care
about may only exist under specific conditions and is hence flow sensitive. For
example, we may need the value range of n in the if bo
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58933
David Edelsohn changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||powerpc*-*-*
Status|UNCONFIR
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58933
Bug ID: 58933
Summary: IRA ICE in update_costs_from_allocno
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: bootstrap
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58932
Bug ID: 58932
Summary: [4.9 Regression][C++11] Deleted functions and SFINAE
in partial template specializations
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
S
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58918
--- Comment #4 from bviyer at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: bviyer
Date: Wed Oct 30 22:51:29 2013
New Revision: 204232
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=204232&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Fix for bug Bootstrap/58918.
+2013-10-30 Balaji V. Iyer
+
+
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58931
Bug ID: 58931
Summary: condition_variable::wait_until overflowed by large
time_point
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
P
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57156
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58183
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58236
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58455
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at redhat dot com
Blocks
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58930
Bug ID: 58930
Summary: [C++11] Bogus error: converting to ... from
initializer list would use explicit constructor
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58369
Mikael Pettersson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||4.9.0
Summary|[4.8/4.9 reg
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58488
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24639
Bug 24639 depends on bug 58488, which changed state.
Bug 58488 Summary: -Wuninitialized is useless for a variable whose address is
later taken
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58488
What|Removed |Add
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58901
--- Comment #2 from Martin Husemann ---
indexable_address_p() returns false for
(symbol_ref:SI ("DECPOWERS") [flags 0x40] )
because flag_pic is true and symbolic_operand (xfoo0, SImode)) returns true:
/* Return true if xfoo0 and xfoo1 constitut
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58929
Bug ID: 58929
Summary: condition_variable does not wait without -pthread
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: minor
Priority: P3
Component: c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58928
Bug ID: 58928
Summary: Different results from gcc when -mlzcnt is used
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58762
--- Comment #2 from congh at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: congh
Date: Wed Oct 30 20:01:47 2013
New Revision: 204229
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=204229&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2013-10-30 Cong Hou
PR target/58762
* config/i386/i386
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58901
--- Comment #1 from Martin Husemann ---
The real question is: why does memory_address_addr_space_p() return false for
this rtx. Stepping into it results in:
0x007618be in vax_legitimate_address_p (mode=HImode, x=0x7ea0fd2c,
strict=20, 5, 212
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58687
--- Comment #13 from Max TenEyck Woodbury ---
(In reply to jos...@codesourcery.com from comment #12)
> On Wed, 30 Oct 2013, mtewoodbury at gmail dot com wrote:
>
>> Thank you, I will look info all of that. My own resources have limits; when
>> i
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58369
--- Comment #5 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
Author: law
Date: Wed Oct 30 19:21:27 2013
New Revision: 204224
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=204224&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/58369
* reload1.c (compute_reload_subreg_offset):
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57316
--- Comment #10 from Daniel Richard G. ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #9)
> What's the status of this bug?
Same as I reported in comment #5---I just confirmed with a build of 4.8.2.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58887
--- Comment #13 from Max TenEyck Woodbury ---
(In reply to jos...@codesourcery.com from comment #12)
>
> I was agreeing with Andrew. Jason, the other maintainer likely to review
> libcpp patches, hasn't commented on this issue. (There are plen
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58927
Bug ID: 58927
Summary: Despite loop->safelen=INT_MAX / GCC ivdep: loop
versioned for vectorization because of possible
aliasing
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58926
Bug ID: 58926
Summary: -Wstrict-overflow unwanted warning comparing variables
initialized from one of static duration
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33426
--- Comment #18 from Tobias Burnus ---
Author: burnus
Date: Wed Oct 30 18:53:42 2013
New Revision: 204223
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=204223&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2013-10-30 Tobias Burnus
gcc/cp/
PR other/33426
* cp-t
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57410
--- Comment #1 from Vladimir Makarov ---
I can not reproduce it on today trunk. I guess it was fixed by some LRA patch
but I ca not say by what patch exactly as there were too many LRA patches since
May.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58581
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58912
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58912
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Wed Oct 30 18:26:53 2013
New Revision: 204222
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=204222&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2013-10-30 Chris Studholme
PR libstdc++/58912
* include/bits/sh
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58912
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Wed Oct 30 18:24:56 2013
New Revision: 204221
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=204221&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2013-10-30 Chris Studholme
PR libstdc++/58912
* include/bits/sh
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58687
--- Comment #12 from joseph at codesourcery dot com ---
On Wed, 30 Oct 2013, mtewoodbury at gmail dot com wrote:
> Thank you, I will look info all of that. My own resources have limits; when
> it
> comes to testing generated code on many archit
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58914
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Known to work|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58295
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|ebotcazou at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58876
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58876
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Yes, I should dig Ian's bug out and have another look. I'm planning to throw
some ideas around on the mailing list ...
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47754
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Oct 30 17:59:44 2013
New Revision: 204219
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=204219&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/47754
* config/i386/i386.c (ix86_avx256_split_vector_move_
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58687
--- Comment #11 from Max TenEyck Woodbury ---
(In reply to Manuel López-Ibáñez from comment #10)
>
> If you are planning to do sporadic GCC development, it may be worthwhile to
> ask for an account in the Compile Farm http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/Comp
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29234
--- Comment #8 from Paolo Carlini ---
Tentative patch here: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-10/msg02536.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58876
--- Comment #3 from Paolo Carlini ---
At some point Ian Taylor filed a Bugzilla about these issues, I think it's
still open. Not sure what we should do in this area...
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58918
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||law at redhat dot com
Assignee
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56341
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Status|UNCO
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58423
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Stat
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58847
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ramana at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comm
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58918
--- Comment #2 from joseph at codesourcery dot com ---
XALLOCA is a libiberty macro, target libraries shouldn't be using
libiberty headers.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58887
--- Comment #12 from joseph at codesourcery dot com ---
On Wed, 30 Oct 2013, mtewoodbury at gmail dot com wrote:
> I think I understand consensus, but I only hear your voice here, not the voice
> of a multitude. You may be part of the consensus
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58876
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |redi at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comm
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58687
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||manu at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56865
--- Comment #18 from Bill Schmidt ---
spawn /home/wschmidt/gcc/build/gcc-mainline-test2/gcc/xgcc -B/home/wschmidt/gcc
/build/gcc-mainline-test2/gcc/ /home/wschmidt/gcc/gcc-mainline-test2/gcc/testsu
ite/gcc.dg/vect/vect-96.c -fno-diagnostics-show-c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58875
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Like PR58876 this is another case where you need -Wsystem-headers to get
warnings from within library code.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58784
--- Comment #1 from Vladimir Makarov ---
Author: vmakarov
Date: Wed Oct 30 15:04:39 2013
New Revision: 204215
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=204215&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2013-10-30 Vladimir Makarov
PR target/58784
* lra.c (check
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58876
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
Status|UNCONFIRM
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56865
--- Comment #17 from Bill Schmidt ---
Initial news is not good -- I am seeing a lot of ICEs go by as the testing
proceeds, including in vect-96.c and vect-42.c.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58925
octoploid at yandex dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bviyer at gmail dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58848
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
The initializer for ReferenceElement::v calls the function in
a constant expression, but G++ doesn't diagnose it unless you instantiate that
member.
You get an error if you do:
int main() {
return Refere
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29234
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|gcc-bugs at g
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58796
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57100
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Known to work|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56865
--- Comment #16 from Bill Schmidt ---
Thanks, testing in progress.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57100
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Wed Oct 30 14:22:01 2013
New Revision: 204211
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=204211&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2013-10-30 Richard Biener
PR middle-end/57100
* basic-block.h
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58924
--- Comment #5 from Sarfaraz Nawaz ---
(In reply to Fanael from comment #1)
> That's expected behavior AFAIU. 'operator<<(basic_ostream&&
> os, const T& x)' is a better match for const char[K] than
> 'basic_ostream& basic_ostream::operator<<(const
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58924
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Component|c++
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58912
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58477
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58418
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener ---
*** Bug 58419 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58419
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58384
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58290
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener -
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58924
--- Comment #3 from Daniel Krügler ---
(In reply to Fanael from comment #1)
I agree with Fanael: It is supposed to be that way in C++11 because of the
provided stream-rvalue support via
template
basic_ostream&
operator<<(basic_ostream&& os, cons
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58298
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58295
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
--- Comment #8 from Richard Biener -
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58252
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58221
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58781
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58182
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58207
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58764
--- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely ---
IMHO following the precise wording of the standard is a mistake, the P/R is
obviously correct and fixing it for 4.9 is necessary. Just IMHO though :)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58125
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener ---
Did you fix it?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58121
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
I suppose a stack limit is necessary, might be 8MB for Andreas(?)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58108
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58094
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58069
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58048
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||4.9.0
Summary|[4.8/4.9 Regres
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58028
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58026
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58862
Paulo J. Matos changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pa...@matos-sorge.com
--- Comment #8 fro
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57955
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
--- Comment #6 from Richard Bien
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57945
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
CC|
1 - 100 of 161 matches
Mail list logo