https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88585
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
--- Comment #4 from Martin Liška -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87089
--- Comment #11 from Martin Liška ---
Is Jason working on that? Can you please link a gcc-patches mailing list
discussion (if there's any).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89335
--- Comment #3 from Martin Liška ---
Is Jason working on that? Can you please link a gcc-patches mailing list
discussion (if there's any).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89516
Bug ID: 89516
Summary: ICE in gfc_calculate_transfer_sizes at
gcc/fortran/check.c:5506
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89497
--- Comment #10 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to darkkirb from comment #9)
> I have bisected the fix a bit (I didn't have enough time today to finish it)
> and i found that the fix has happened in one of the 322 commits between
>
> d1540be4d3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89494
--- Comment #7 from Piotr Kubaj ---
It still crashes (test was done with 7.4.0), but we're getting somewhere.
It crashes at:
libtool: compile:
/usr/local/poudriere/ports/default/lang/gcc7/work/.build/./gcc/xgcc
-shared-libgcc -B/usr/local/poudri
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89490
--- Comment #19 from Alan Modra ---
Created attachment 45829
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=45829&action=edit
Prevent use of merge sections when -fsection-anchors
This isn't particularly elegant, but survives bootstrap and
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89490
--- Comment #18 from Alan Modra ---
The assertion triggered in multiple places when compiling various libgcc2.c
pieces, and dfp-bit.c.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89350
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
--- Comment #10 from Martin Sebor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12245
Frank Ch. Eigler changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||fche at redhat dot com
--- Comment #6
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=704
--- Comment #22 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to Eric Gallager from comment #21)
> (In reply to Iain Sandoe from comment #20)
> > (In reply to Eric Gallager from comment #19)
> > > (In reply to jos...@codesourcery.com from comment #18)
> > > > W
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89490
--- Comment #17 from Alan Modra ---
The correct place for comment #15 patch is get_block_for_decl, I think. I'm
bootstrapping such a patch along with an assert in output_object_block that we
don't have a merge section.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89502
--- Comment #7 from H.J. Lu ---
rtx
memory_address_addr_space (machine_mode mode, rtx x, addr_space_t as)
{
rtx oldx = x;
scalar_int_mode address_mode = targetm.addr_space.address_mode (as);
x = convert_memory_address_addr_space (address_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87199
--- Comment #5 from Ev Drikos ---
Hello,
At first, I'd like to note that these 2 options are also ok in MacOS-10.13:
(a) g++8 -g -std=c++11 lib.cpp main.c -o main && ./main
(b) g++8 -g -std=c++11 -I . main.c-S
g++8 -g -std
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89477
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89477
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Tue Feb 26 23:12:44 2019
New Revision: 269234
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269234&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/89477 constrain deduction guides for maps and sets
The Comp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82853
Orr Shalom Dvory changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dvoreader at gmail dot com
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83670
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Status|UNC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89515
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83670
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hdu...@tangerine-soft.de
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89515
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Most likely a dup of bug 83670.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89490
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89515
Bug ID: 89515
Summary: m32c ICE error: in leaf_function_p, at final.c:4492
when compiling newlib 3.1.0 with XGCC 8.3.0
Product: gcc
Version: 8.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89513
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89490
--- Comment #15 from Bernd Edlinger ---
I wonder if this would also work?
At least for simple test cases that seems to be fine.
--- varasm.c.orig 2019-01-25 17:57:32.0 +0100
+++ varasm.c2019-02-26 22:03:39.753325517 +0100
@@ -3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89507
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87996
Bug 87996 depends on bug 89507, which changed state.
Bug 89507 Summary: [9 Regression] bogus "size of array exceeds maximum object
size"
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89507
What|Removed |Added
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89507
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Feb 26 21:27:33 2019
New Revision: 269233
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269233&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/89507
* tree.c (valid_constant_size_p): Deal with s
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89500
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89511
--- Comment #10 from Marek Polacek ---
(In reply to Paolo Carlini from comment #9)
> Totally agreed.
Thanks (also thanks for the DR reference)!.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89511
--- Comment #9 from Paolo Carlini ---
Totally agreed.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89511
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89511
--- Comment #7 from Paolo Carlini ---
Thus, to repeat, if we only want to avoid the regression part, it would be just
matter of changing the code I added for c++/60265 to do qscope =
CP_TYPE_CONTEXT (qscope) only when we end-up in a namespace. On
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89511
--- Comment #6 from Paolo Carlini ---
Yes, it works, it's c++/60265.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89500
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Feb 26 20:36:29 2019
New Revision: 269230
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269230&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR tree-optimization/89500
* tree-ssa-strlen.c (stridx_str
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89416
--- Comment #8 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Tue Feb 26 20:34:46 2019
New Revision: 269229
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269229&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/89416 fix alloc insertable trait for clang (again)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89511
--- Comment #5 from Marek Polacek ---
This works:
namespace N {
enum E { e };
using E::e;
}
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89511
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|ice-on-invalid-code |ice-on-valid-code
--- Comment #4 from Ma
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89511
--- Comment #3 from Paolo Carlini ---
To clarify a bit: if I revert r211479 we don't ICE anymore on the new testcase
but we reject it anyway and using-enum-1.C too, which instead we should accept.
By the way, Core/1742 is still open ;)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89514
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Depends on||87295
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89514
Bug ID: 89514
Summary: -g -fdebug-types-section -flto gives 'Dwarf Error: bad
length' in gdb
Product: gcc
Version: 8.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89492
--- Comment #5 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: anlauf
Date: Tue Feb 26 20:03:08 2019
New Revision: 269227
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269227&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2019-02-26 Harald Anlauf
PR fortran/89492
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89497
--- Comment #9 from darkkirb at darkkirb dot de ---
I have bisected the fix a bit (I didn't have enough time today to finish it)
and i found that the fix has happened in one of the 322 commits between
d1540be4d3b4b8ac6d19997539c13d2ca74f65e4 (20
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89513
Bug ID: 89513
Summary: constexpr functions with function try block shouldn't
be accepted at least with -pedantic in
-std=c++{11,14,17} modes
Product: gcc
Version:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63426
Bug 63426 depends on bug 89496, which changed state.
Bug 89496 Summary: [9 Regression] gcc/fortran/trans-types.c:3015:9: runtime
error: member access within null pointer of type 'struct gfc_formal_arglist'
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cg
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89496
--- Comment #5 from Thomas Koenig ---
Author: tkoenig
Date: Tue Feb 26 19:10:00 2019
New Revision: 269226
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269226&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2019-02-26 Thomas Koenig
PR fortran/89496
* trans-ty
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89496
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89511
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milest
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89512
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89507
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
Assignee|msebor at gcc dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89511
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|ICE in push_using_decl_1, |[7/8/9 Regression] ICE in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89434
--- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek ---
The PR89506 patch might contain a fix for this.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89490
--- Comment #14 from Bernd Edlinger ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #13)
>
> Well, it matches what output_constant does:
> case STRING_CST:
> thissize = (unsigned HOST_WIDE_INT)TREE_STRING_LENGTH (exp);
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89511
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89434
Tamar Christina changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tnfchris at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89410
--- Comment #20 from Segher Boessenkool ---
Maybe you want to say .-1 instead of -1 ?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89171
Andreas Schwab changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|riscv64-*-* |
--- Comment #5 from Andreas Schwab --
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89512
Bug ID: 89512
Summary: ICE in get_expr_operands, at tree-ssa-operands.c:882
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67542
G. Steinmetz changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gs...@t-online.de
--- Comment #9 from G.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89212
--- Comment #10 from Marek Polacek ---
Author: mpolacek
Date: Tue Feb 26 18:00:41 2019
New Revision: 269222
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269222&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/89212 - ICE converting nullptr to pointer-to-member-fun
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89212
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89511
Bug ID: 89511
Summary: ICE in push_using_decl_1, at cp/name-lookup.c:3845
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89510
Bug ID: 89510
Summary: new_allocator::construct needs to be constrained
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: li
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89507
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
The reason to change tree.c rather than doing something on the cp/init.c side
is the comment there that the checking ought to be done before conversion to
std::size_t (and also, we'd fold to sizetype just for
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89507
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 45828
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=45828&action=edit
gcc9-pr89507.patch
Untested patch I have right now.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89507
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|diagnostic |rejects-valid
Status|UNCONFIR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87761
--- Comment #14 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
Author: law
Date: Tue Feb 26 17:08:06 2019
New Revision: 269218
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269218&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/87761
* regcprop.c (copyprop_hardreg_f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89501
--- Comment #8 from Linus Torvalds ---
(In reply to Jeffrey A. Law from comment #7)
> It's reliably the case that a false positive uninit warning also represents
> a failure to optimize something. So we've got significant incentives to
> deeply
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89507
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89416
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Resolution|FIXED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89501
--- Comment #7 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
It's reliably the case that a false positive uninit warning also represents a
failure to optimize something. So we've got significant incentives to deeply
analyze and look for fixes. So feel free to pass e
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89501
--- Comment #6 from Linus Torvalds ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #5)
>
> And this meeting helps us avoid bogus warnings for cases where GCC has
> difficulties proving dead code paths are actually dead ...
Ack. I do see the diffi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89490
--- Comment #13 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Bernd Edlinger from comment #11)
> Instead of:
>
> if (thissize == 0
> || TREE_STRING_POINTER (str) [thissize - 1] != '\0')
> size = MAX (size, thissiz
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89490
--- Comment #12 from Bernd Edlinger ---
> These should not go into mergeable sections.
I mean: These do not go into mergeable sections.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89490
--- Comment #11 from Bernd Edlinger ---
I agree, that it would be better to not put any
mergeable things in a block object. If section anchors
are ever used on a string constant, it is going to fail.
A constant with size = 0 is possible, for in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89509
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
Created attachment 45827
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=45827&action=edit
the patch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89507
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
Priority|P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89506
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89490
--- Comment #10 from Jakub Jelinek ---
I think there is a serious flaw that the section anchor infrastructure is used
at all for the SECTION_MERGE sections, one really must not use any kind of
section anchors for those sections, there is no guara
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89482
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86535
--- Comment #15 from Ian Lance Taylor ---
I committed a patch that should fix the nanotime problem.
Some of the other issues you describe will most likely require a fix in the
libgo/mkrsysinfo.sh script, which generates the file runtime_sysinfo.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86535
--- Comment #14 from ian at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: ian
Date: Tue Feb 26 14:46:56 2019
New Revision: 269214
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269214&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR go/86535
runtime: always declare nanotime in Go
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89481
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89481
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Feb 26 14:37:39 2019
New Revision: 269213
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269213&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/89481
* constexpr.c (cxx_eval_store_expression): Wh
办PP
理 $ +Q+V+信#%
--
& $ -- I 3 4
髮 $--- 2 4 3 4
& $ ---6 1 4 8
漂 $
-2019/2/26
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89410
--- Comment #19 from Tamar Christina ---
Hmm we're running it on
Tcl: 8.5
Expect: 5.45
Dejagnu: 1.5.1
So I think those are about the same..
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71446
--- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek ---
So, shall we never try ck_list conversion for CONSTRUCTORs with any designators
(while for -std=c++2a we'll complain if there is a mix of designated
initializer clauses and non-designated initializ clauses, I
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89509
Bug ID: 89509
Summary: restrict doesnt work with subfield accesses
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-op
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89509
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
Status|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89505
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Tue Feb 26 14:09:19 2019
New Revision: 269212
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269212&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2019-02-26 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/89505
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89505
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Priority|P1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71446
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||rejects-valid
Status|UNCON
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89479
--- Comment #7 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Tue, 26 Feb 2019, eyalroz at technion dot ac.il wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89479
>
> --- Comment #5 from Eyal Rozenberg ---
> (In reply to Richard Biener from comme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89410
--- Comment #18 from David Malcolm ---
(In reply to Tamar Christina from comment #17)
> Hi,
>
> I'm getting a test failure on master for these new tests
>
> UNRESOLVED: gcc.dg/pr89410-1.c: bad option "-1": must be -exact, -glob,
> -regexp, or
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89502
--- Comment #6 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #5)
> I think we should avoid %fs:(%edx) address. Is that possible to generate
It is what middle-end expands to, so nothing much that we can do here.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89171
--- Comment #4 from Ian Lance Taylor ---
To run, say, just the go/build test, cd to the libgo build directory and run
"make go/build/check". To keep the test binary around, run "make
GOTESTFLAGS=--keep go/build/check". That will leave the test
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89506
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88530
Tamar Christina changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||andrewm.roberts at sky dot com
--- Com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89508
Tamar Christina changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89506
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
1 - 100 of 168 matches
Mail list logo
