https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80062
Bug ID: 80062
Summary: gcc/c-family/c-cppbuiltin.c: PVS-Studio: V581
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: oth
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52477
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71437
--- Comment #18 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
Author: law
Date: Thu Mar 16 03:19:35 2017
New Revision: 246186
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246186&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/71437
* tree-ssa-dom.c (struct cond_e
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71437
--- Comment #18 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
Author: law
Date: Thu Mar 16 03:19:35 2017
New Revision: 246186
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246186&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/71437
* tree-ssa-dom.c (struct cond_e
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58054
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51428
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80042
--- Comment #3 from Craig Topper ---
No -fmath-errno has no effect. It does have effect on other functions such as
cosh or acos.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70515
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79790
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80042
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egall at gwmail dot gwu.edu
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43989
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47591
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||build
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70377
--- Comment #2 from Martin Sebor ---
I've raised bug 80061 for the error GCC issues for the submitted test case
after the bug(s) in have been corrected.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80061
Bug ID: 80061
Summary: error on constexpr function with an unevaluated throw
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Componen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70377
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||error-recovery,
|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80043
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|ice-on-valid-code |ice-on-invalid-code
Status|A
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39982
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||rejects-valid
Status|UNCONFIR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69054
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53731
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68069
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44943
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57683
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60515
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67479
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
See A
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78014
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80060
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80017
--- Comment #2 from Vladimir Makarov ---
Author: vmakarov
Date: Wed Mar 15 23:04:09 2017
New Revision: 246181
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246181&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2017-03-15 Vladimir Makarov
PR target/80017
* lr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52477
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80060
Bug ID: 80060
Summary: RFE: -Wformat knob to ignore same-width incorrect
types
Product: gcc
Version: 6.3.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priori
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52471
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33777
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69499
--- Comment #11 from Jerry DeLisle ---
Always helps to double check. The three original test cases do not ICE on
trunk and gfc_release_symbol is already NULL guarded internally. I would not
chase this further on trunk for the first three cases.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51769
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50398
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80059
Bug ID: 80059
Summary: [7 Regression] ICE with invalid noexcept for
__transaction_atomic
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-invali
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47923
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69499
--- Comment #10 from Jerry DeLisle ---
Very good question, maybe we do:
if (p)
gfc_release_symbol (p);
I will try it.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80043
--- Comment #2 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Wed Mar 15 21:32:43 2017
New Revision: 246180
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246180&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/80043 - ICE with -fpermissive
* typeck.c (convert_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60808
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59608
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79038
--- Comment #5 from Michael Meissner ---
Author: meissner
Date: Wed Mar 15 21:17:35 2017
New Revision: 246178
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246178&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[gcc]
2017-03-15 Michael Meissner
PR target/79038
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54584
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80057
--- Comment #2 from Roland Illig ---
Citing from the PDF document:
> The Virtualization Application-Specific Extension (Module) requires the
> following base architecture support:
The current GCC code split these words at the following boundar
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80043
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33271
--- Comment #22 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Author: segher
Date: Wed Mar 15 20:48:49 2017
New Revision: 246174
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246174&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
rs6000: Do not xfail nint_2.f90 on Linux systems
It was XFAILed be
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80047
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|other |bootstrap
--- Comment #3 from Martin Sebo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80058
Bug ID: 80058
Summary: fix double spaces is string literals everywhere
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: oth
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80047
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
>char cwdbuf[MAXPATHLEN];
This is not a GNU style thing. GNU style mentions against using arbitrary
limits.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80047
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||build
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62045
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[5/6/7 Regression] |[5/6 Regression]
|__
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62045
--- Comment #10 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Wed Mar 15 20:11:48 2017
New Revision: 246173
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246173&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/62045 fix O(N) insertion in pd_ds binary heap
2017-03-15
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71294
Michael Meissner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #38580|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71294
Michael Meissner changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigne
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71294
--- Comment #16 from Michael Meissner ---
You need power8 support for the bug to show itself. In order to have power8
(ISA 2.07) support, you need a binutils that supports at least the power8
instructions.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80055
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71294
--- Comment #15 from Segher Boessenkool ---
You need to build GCC with a new enough binutils, 2.24 I believe.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69499
--- Comment #9 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
Just a quick question: are you sure that removing 'gfc_release_symbol (p);'
does not cause a memory leak in the normal case?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62181
--- Comment #9 from Martin Sebor ---
(In reply to Xi Ruoyao from comment #8)
> (In reply to Xi Ruoyao from comment #7)
>
> > We should make a new PR requesting for clang -Warray-bounds as well. It's
> > a part of meta-bug PR30334.
>
> Sorry. W
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71294
--- Comment #14 from Bernd Schmidt ---
I can't reproduce this, but that's probably because of
cc1plus: warning: will not generate power8 instructions because assembler
lacks power8 support
Binutils was just configured for ppc64le-linux - do I
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62181
--- Comment #8 from Xi Ruoyao ---
(In reply to Xi Ruoyao from comment #7)
> We should make a new PR requesting for clang -Warray-bounds as well. It's
> a part of meta-bug PR30334.
Sorry. We have -Warray-bounds, but not as well as clang's. For
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62181
--- Comment #7 from Xi Ruoyao ---
(In reply to Martin Sebor from comment #6)
> With constant arguments (or those whose value or range is known), GCC should
> warn on the first declaration in comment #0 (copied below) not necessarily
> because the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80057
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69499
--- Comment #8 from Jerry DeLisle ---
I will take care of it. Thanks Nicolas
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80057
Bug ID: 80057
Summary: typo in mips.opt: Virtualization Application Specific
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Componen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80056
Bug ID: 80056
Summary: gcc.dg/tree-prof/pr66295.c fails on powerpc
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: other
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71294
--- Comment #13 from Michael Meissner ---
FWIW, it does not fail for -mcpu=power7 or -mcpu=power9. If you use
-mcpu=power7, there is no direct move. If you use -mcpu=power9, the MTVSRDD
instruction is generated which bypasses the part that is f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79860
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69499
--- Comment #7 from Nicolas Koenig ---
(In reply to Jerry DeLisle from comment #6)
>
> This falls into the PITA classification. Also known as simple enough,
> regression test and commit. (consider it approved)
I don't think I can submit patches
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79860
--- Comment #2 from David Malcolm ---
Author: dmalcolm
Date: Wed Mar 15 18:05:06 2017
New Revision: 246170
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246170&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Fix translation issue with character length * errors (PR fortran/79860)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78687
--- Comment #6 from Martin Jambor ---
Created attachment 40979
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=40979&action=edit
Possible fix
This patch addresses the issue and passes bootstrap and testing on
x86_64-linux. It is definitely
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79856
--- Comment #8 from Roland Illig ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #7)
> I like your rules. My question was more about how practically do you
> distinguish between such strings? My plan is to create a new
> DK_INTERNAL_ERROR type, which
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80055
Bug ID: 80055
Summary: do not mark arguments of internal_error for i18n
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62181
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #6
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80054
Bug ID: 80054
Summary: ICE in verify_ssa with -O3
-march=broadwell/skylake-avx512
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pri
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80053
Bug ID: 80053
Summary: Label with address taken should prevent duplication of
containing basic block
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: wro
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80052
James Greenhalgh changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80052
Bug ID: 80052
Summary: typo in aarch64.opt: dummping
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
Assi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79356
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80019
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80019
--- Comment #4 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: uros
Date: Wed Mar 15 16:15:53 2017
New Revision: 246168
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246168&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/80019
* config/i386/i386.c (ix86_vector_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80051
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79356
--- Comment #10 from Jiong Wang ---
Author: jiwang
Date: Wed Mar 15 15:33:12 2017
New Revision: 246167
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246167&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[gcc, testsuite] Don't xfail on arm
PR testsuite/79356
* g
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80019
--- Comment #3 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: uros
Date: Wed Mar 15 15:27:28 2017
New Revision: 246166
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246166&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/80019
* config/i386/i386.c (ix86_vector_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77631
--- Comment #8 from Thomas Schwinge ---
(In reply to myself from comment #6)
> This has been (with low priority) on my long TODO list
> for some time: ever since I started using -gsplit-dwarf and noticed that
> GCC's Internal Compiler Error (ICE)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80045
--- Comment #4 from Florent Hivert ---
I should have said first : thanks for analizing the problem !!!
I wasn't sure about the proper way to do thing and I was afraid that no one
Cilk aware was following gcc-help. Anyway I should have mentioned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77728
--- Comment #6 from Yichao Yu ---
Anything new here?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80051
Bug ID: 80051
Summary: gcc/dwarf2out.c: PVS-Studio: V501
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: other
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80050
Bug ID: 80050
Summary: gcc/genmatch.c: PVS-Studio: V590
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: other
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80049
Bug ID: 80049
Summary: gcc/genmodes.c: PVS-Studio: NULL Pointer Dereference
(CWE-476)
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80048
Bug ID: 80048
Summary: gcc/sese.c: PVS-Studio: Improper Release of Memory
Before Removing Last Reference (CWE-401)
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80047
Bug ID: 80047
Summary: fixincludes/fixincl.c: PVS-Studio: Improper Release of
Memory Before Removing Last Reference (CWE-401)
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0.1
Status: UNCONFIR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80046
Bug ID: 80046
Summary: Explicit interface required for at (1): pointer
argument
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priori
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64089
--- Comment #13 from Francois-Xavier Coudert ---
Can we apply this patch to trunk before 7.1 is released? It would allow to
build and run jit on Darwin:
diff --git a/gcc/jit/Make-lang.in b/gcc/jit/Make-lang.in
index 44d0750..4df2a9c 100644
--- a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66295
Jiong Wang changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jiwang at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #11 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80019
--- Comment #2 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: uros
Date: Wed Mar 15 13:38:51 2017
New Revision: 246161
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246161&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/80019
* config/i386/i386.c (ix86_vector_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80038
--- Comment #10 from Xi Ruoyao ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #3)
> which means the spawned copies use a shared vnew and a single destructor
> is run "afterwards". If there's no synchronization then all threads will
> call the dest
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79939
Thomas Schwinge changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80038
Xi Ruoyao changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ryxi at stu dot xidian.edu.cn
--- Comment #9
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80045
Xi Ruoyao changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80045
--- Comment #2 from Xi Ruoyao ---
On 2017-03-15 10:50 +, florent.hivert at lri dot fr wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80045
>
> --- Comment #1 from Florent Hivert ---
> I'm not sure why you created a new report. I alre
1 - 100 of 115 matches
Mail list logo
