https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88739
--- Comment #46 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #44)
> Created attachment 45523 [details]
> workaround
>
> So I am testing the following workaround, at least "most suitable" for
> branches.
> It avoids generating
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87295
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|nathan at gcc dot gnu.org |rguenth at gcc dot
gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33719
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58312
--- Comment #5 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to Brooks Moses from comment #4)
> It turns out that we do need these symbols in libssp despite having a nice
> plain x86-Linux environment. We've got some precompiled blobs from
> who-knows-where
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51677
--- Comment #5 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to Eric Gallager from comment #4)
> (In reply to Martin Sebor from comment #3)
> > It should be easy to white-list the main function in the
> > -Wsuggest-attribute= checker. At the same time, I'm n
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52202
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jens.maurer at gmx dot net
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54254
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ian at airs dot com
--- Comment #2 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33719
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85780
--- Comment #9 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Patch submitted.
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2019-01/msg00236.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89045
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89036
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85780
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Resolution|FI
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89056
--- Comment #4 from Darryl Okahata ---
This seems rather draconian but, if the standard allows for that, so be it.
Thanks.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89052
--- Comment #2 from joseph at codesourcery dot com ---
I'd say it's a bug for GCC to need to allocate memory for the trailing
zero-initialized part of such an object at all; it should only need to
allocate memory for the initial part and rememb
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89056
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
See https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86761#c4 on the differences
between C and C++.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89056
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
You can use -fsanatizer=undefined to find this behavior at runtime.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89056
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86761
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||darryl_okahata at keysight dot
com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89056
Bug ID: 89056
Summary: Optimizer generates bad code for non-void function
that fails to return a value
Product: gcc
Version: 8.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89055
Bug ID: 89055
Summary: wrong location with predefined macros
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: trivial
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89054
Bug ID: 89054
Summary: libphobos/src/std/math.d:5279:18: error: undefined
iden tifier 'ControlState'
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: nor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81691
Tom de Vries changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87834
Tom de Vries changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89053
Bug ID: 89053
Summary: initializer-string too long for a large char array
initialized with empty string
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89052
--- Comment #1 from Martin Sebor ---
Clang seems to use SIZE_MAX / 8 as the maximum object size and gives an error
for any object whose size exceeds that. But it doesn't seem to doesn't track
total object sizes and crashes in LLVM as it runs out
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89052
Bug ID: 89052
Summary: excessive data segment size causes a hang
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: middle-en
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87295
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80916
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89051
Bug ID: 89051
Summary: -Wno-error= does not work for warning groups
Product: gcc
Version: 8.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88995
Nathan Sidwell changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88995
--- Comment #3 from Nathan Sidwell ---
template struct dn
{
static void execute (long *ary)
{
constexpr int index = 0;
[&] { auto &elt = ary [index]; };
}
};
void foo ()
{
dn::execute;
}
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88643
Sergei Trofimovich changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||slyfox at inbox dot ru
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88956
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
--- Comment #3 from Martin Sebor -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88821
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #45514|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89001
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89036
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Status|UNC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86125
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85868
--- Comment #5 from Harald Anlauf ---
Better testcase for debugging:
program pr85858
implicit none
integer, pointer :: t(:)
integer :: i, lb
lb = -1
allocate (t(lb:5))
do i = lb, 5
t(i) = i
end do
call te (t( :))
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88995
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89036
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89043
--- Comment #5 from Martin Sebor ---
Ah, makes sense. I briefly wondered how stpcpy could have been "updated for
alignment with the ISO/IEC 9899:1999 standard." That's the trade-off of a 4k
monitor: it fits tons of stuff on the screen but every
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=6
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89001
--- Comment #4 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Thu Jan 24 21:23:33 2019
New Revision: 268252
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=268252&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/89001 - mangling of reference temporaries
It used to be th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87214
--- Comment #23 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 45528
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=45528&action=edit
gcc9-pr87214-wip.patch
Untested fix. Still need to cover all the changes with testcases.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86308
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[7/8/9 Regression] ICE in |[7/8 Regression] ICE in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86125
--- Comment #5 from Martin Sebor ---
Author: msebor
Date: Thu Jan 24 21:06:01 2019
New Revision: 268251
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=268251&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c/86125 - missing -Wbuiltin-declaration-mismatch on a mismatched return
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=6
--- Comment #4 from Martin Sebor ---
Author: msebor
Date: Thu Jan 24 21:06:01 2019
New Revision: 268251
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=268251&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c/86125 - missing -Wbuiltin-declaration-mismatch on a mismatched return
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86308
--- Comment #7 from Martin Sebor ---
Author: msebor
Date: Thu Jan 24 21:06:01 2019
New Revision: 268251
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=268251&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c/86125 - missing -Wbuiltin-declaration-mismatch on a mismatched return
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89043
--- Comment #4 from joseph at codesourcery dot com ---
On Thu, 24 Jan 2019, msebor at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> The CHANGE HISTORY section for stpcpy says the function was first released in
> Issue 1 and derived from Issue 1 of the SVID:
> http:/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88948
--- Comment #4 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: uros
Date: Thu Jan 24 20:48:01 2019
New Revision: 268249
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=268249&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/88948
* rtl.h (prepare_copy_insn): New p
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87214
--- Comment #22 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Even more reduced testcase:
typedef long long int V __attribute__((vector_size (4 * sizeof (long long
int;
__attribute__((noipa))
void foo (V *p)
{
p[0] = __builtin_shuffle (p[1], p[2], (V) { 2, 3, 5,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55319
m101010a at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89043
--- Comment #3 from Martin Sebor ---
The CHANGE HISTORY section for stpcpy says the function was first released in
Issue 1 and derived from Issue 1 of the SVID:
http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/functions/stpcpy.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89037
rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assigne
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88993
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87214
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89006
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89006
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Jan 24 20:20:47 2019
New Revision: 268248
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=268248&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR debug/89006
* config/i386/i386.c (ix86_pic_register_p):
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89050
Bug ID: 89050
Summary: GCC sometimes requires this to be captured when doing
overload resolution but selecting a static member
function
Product: gcc
Version: 8.2.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87214
rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
Component|tre
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87214
--- Comment #19 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
---
OK. The .optimized dumps seem to be the same for both -mavx2 and
-march=skylake-avx512. Things only diverge during expand.
It looks like it might be a bug in:
(define_insn "avx512dq_shuf_6
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89049
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||x86_64-linux
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89049
Bug ID: 89049
Summary: [8/9 Regression] Unexpected vectorization
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-opti
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89001
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88976
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||9.0
Summary|[7/8/9 Regression
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89015
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88964
--- Comment #11 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Jan 24 19:49:09 2019
New Revision: 268247
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=268247&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/88964
* gimple-loop-interchange.cc (
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89020
--- Comment #5 from Steve Kargl ---
On Thu, Jan 24, 2019 at 01:32:56PM +, tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
>
> However, I'd like to look at the code first and check if we
> can actually accommodate this strange behavior without pessimizing
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89048
--- Comment #1 from Barry Revzin ---
Actually, now I'm really not sure if this is a gcc bug, but then I really don't
know what the language rule is that rejects this. Sorry for the spam, this
needs some more thought.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89035
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89043
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89038
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89015
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Jan 24 19:17:13 2019
New Revision: 268246
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=268246&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR middle-end/89015
* tree-nested.c (convert_nonlocal_refe
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88998
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88976
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Jan 24 19:16:21 2019
New Revision: 268245
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=268245&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/88976
* c-typeck.c (c_finish_omp_cancel): Diagnose
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89027
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Jan 24 19:14:51 2019
New Revision: 268243
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=268243&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/89027
* tree-inline.c (add_clobbers_t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88998
--- Comment #7 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: uros
Date: Thu Jan 24 19:14:58 2019
New Revision: 268244
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=268244&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/88998
* config/i386/sse.md (sse2_cvtpi2p
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89048
Bug ID: 89048
Summary: constant evaluation in trailing return type rejected
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88998
--- Comment #6 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: uros
Date: Thu Jan 24 19:12:55 2019
New Revision: 268242
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=268242&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/88998
* config/i386/sse.md (sse2_cvtpi2p
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87214
--- Comment #18 from Martin Liška ---
One can reproduce that with Intel SDE simulator:
https://software.intel.com/protected-download/267266/144917
$ ./sde-external-8.16.0-2018-01-30-lin/sde -skx -- /tmp/a.out
wrong at: 3: is 15, should be 17
Abo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87214
--- Comment #17 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to rsand...@gcc.gnu.org from comment #16)
> Created attachment 45526 [details]
> Passing testcase
>
> I'm still not sure where the problem is coming in. The loop in the vector
> dump looks functio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87187
--- Comment #9 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
This fixes also libgomp.fortran/taskloop3.f90. Thanks.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88951
--- Comment #4 from Bence Szabó ---
Ok, I agree with all of what you wrote. Please close the PR as you wish.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88989
--- Comment #5 from Iain Buclaw ---
(In reply to Iain Buclaw from comment #4)
> ported to as many platforms as possible. Then switch over to the D branch
> and be in lock-step with upstream dmd with regards to the latest
> implementation.
I mea
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88989
--- Comment #4 from Iain Buclaw ---
(In reply to G. Steinmetz from comment #3)
>
> Commit was from 2018-01-14, i.e. over a year ago.
> That makes me wonder, when will gdc be synchronized with dmd ?
>
The main dmd branch has been converted over
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89047
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89038
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89035
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89045
Bug ID: 89045
Summary: [9 Regression] ICE in get_parm_info, at
c/c-decl.c:7518
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88760
--- Comment #22 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Some more experiments...
Unrolling 4x in a similar way to my previous example and not splitting the
accumulator (separate issue):
unsigned int *colnums;
double *val;
struct foostruct
{
unsig
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89046
Bug ID: 89046
Summary: GCOV generates incorrect results for C++ Lambda /
Constructor
Product: gcc
Version: 8.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89047
Bug ID: 89047
Summary: ICE in mark_scope_block_unused, at tree-ssa-live.c:391
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compone
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89009
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89009
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work|6.5.0 |4.9.4
Known to fail|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89039
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86865
Sebastian Pop changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||spop at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #7 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87214
--- Comment #16 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
---
Created attachment 45526
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=45526&action=edit
Passing testcase
I'm still not sure where the problem is coming in. The loop in the vector dum
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89009
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
--- Comment #9 from Martin Liška ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44715
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88984
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
1 - 100 of 242 matches
Mail list logo
