https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98343
--- Comment #4 from Pekka S ---
And indeed the patch works on x86_64-w64-mingw32, too.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98368
Bug ID: 98368
Summary: Seg fault on template method missing required return
statement
Product: gcc
Version: 10.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98301
--- Comment #3 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 49791
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=49791&action=edit
new diff with improvements
New diff with a better implementation.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98367
--- Comment #1 from Justin Bassett ---
It also ICEs with a segfault even if the `myobject` doesn't do CTAD itself but
has its type explicitly specified: https://godbolt.org/z/Mjfe6c .
Inlining the non-CTAD version does not ICE, though:
https://g
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98367
Bug ID: 98367
Summary: ICE with CTAD non-type template parameter
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96840
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Patrick Palka :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:79f57d5cb070bb02ea0a34b5f42658d6659b19a8
commit r11-6245-g79f57d5cb070bb02ea0a34b5f42658d6659b19a8
Author: Patrick Palka
Date: Th
hread model: posix
Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib
gcc version 11.0.0 20201217 (experimental) (GCC)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98366
--- Comment #1 from Marek Polacek ---
Seems like since that revision we completely elide the memcmp check.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98366
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |11.0
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98366
Bug ID: 98366
Summary: [11 Regression] wrong-code with memcmp and -m32
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: mi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98348
--- Comment #4 from Hongtao.liu ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #3)
> Started with r10-5250-g8b905e9b0c09530c0f660563540257f3d181c2ac
> Perhaps peephole2s or something similar to catch that?
A patch(with peephole2) is posted at
https
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98365
Bug ID: 98365
Summary: Miss vectoization
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimization
Assi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94722
--- Comment #10 from Nick Desaulniers ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #9)
> I've said in that thread that I don't really like disabling the inlining, if
> we wanted to make sure everything is stack protected, we'd need to disable
> al
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97704
--- Comment #3 from gcc-bugs at marehr dot dialup.fu-berlin.de ---
Thank you, Marek Polacek for finding that revision.
I checked out the master branch and reverted the commit
f1612b8ae8a60f62cf5456b3357a341550534a7e and now everything compiles ag
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98364
Bug ID: 98364
Summary: C++20 module binary bloat
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80588
Ivan Sučić changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||sucicf1 at outlook dot com
--- Comment #2 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98363
cqwrteur changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||unlvsur at live dot com
--- Comment #1 from c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98363
Bug ID: 98363
Summary: C++ 20 module ICE for fast_io library
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98362
Bug ID: 98362
Summary: bad file data on Windows for C++ 20 module
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98361
Bug ID: 98361
Summary: L1/L2 cache characteristics not recognized with
-mtune=znver2
Product: gcc
Version: 10.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98321
--- Comment #3 from Tom de Vries ---
(In reply to Thomas Schwinge from comment #2)
> However, my report was specifically for the nvptx target compiler. Just
> compile with 'nvptx-gcc -fopenacc -S' the code I posed, and compare
> '-DTYPE=int'/'-D
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98315
Nathan Sidwell changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98321
--- Comment #2 from Thomas Schwinge ---
Thanks for having a look.
(In reply to Tom de Vries from comment #1)
> Ok, let's first make a runnable test-case:
> ...
> $ cat src/libgomp/testsuite/libgomp.oacc-c/test.c
> [...]
> Indeed we see the cas,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98348
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98347
rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|A
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98347
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Sandiford :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:00bad763dcb903103d62e1ef77c542dacf31fc0a
commit r11-6241-g00bad763dcb903103d62e1ef77c542dacf31fc0a
Author: Richard Sandiford
Da
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98359
--- Comment #4 from cqwrteur ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #2)
> Maybe fixed by r11-6240-g4a7a3110c70da8bad6978a36d9da3836538a0cc3
Fixed confirm.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98359
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98359
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Maybe fixed by r11-6240-g4a7a3110c70da8bad6978a36d9da3836538a0cc3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98359
--- Comment #1 from cqwrteur ---
This patch breaks all platforms it looks like. Even linux has this bug now.
Please fix it asap or it will break everything.
-things like cost calculations or profiling frequencies. The default\n\
+things like
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98360
Bug ID: 98360
Summary: sizeof in template difference between g++/icc and
clang++
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prior
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98359
Bug ID: 98359
Summary: bootstrapping failure on windows
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: bootstrap
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98357
--- Comment #1 from Jeff Muizelaar ---
Clang compiles this to:
foo(char*, unsigned long, unsigned long, unsigned long):
# @foo(char*, unsigned long, unsigned long, unsigned long)
xor eax, eax
cmp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98144
--- Comment #7 from Andrew Macleod ---
PR 98174 has that patch applied btw.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98358
Nathan Sidwell changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |nathan at gcc dot
gnu.org
--- C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97417
--- Comment #53 from jiawei ---
Hi Jim,
Levy had asked me to help about the test. I was resigned on EEMBC and
waiting acess for more benchmarks. Now I am testing on csibe and
coremax-pro. I think will lineout the result in this week.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98358
Bug ID: 98358
Summary: new test case g++.dg/template/pr98297.C in r8-10683
fails
Product: gcc
Version: 8.4.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98347
--- Comment #3 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
---
Bah, stupid thinko: using regno_raw_mode[regno] instead of
GET_MODE (regno_reg_rtx[regno]) for general registers :-(
Testing a fix.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97417
--- Comment #52 from Jim Wilson ---
I did some simple testing of my patch alone. I modified the
riscv-gnu-toolchain makefile to use -Os to build all libraries, built a
rv32imac/ilp32 toolchain, and looked at library code size. I see a few cases
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98342
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pault at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98340
Nathan Sidwell changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98340
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Nathan Sidwell :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:2d7a40fa60fb8b9870cfd053a37fc67404353ee2
commit r11-6237-g2d7a40fa60fb8b9870cfd053a37fc67404353ee2
Author: Nathan Sidwell
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98340
--- Comment #6 from Nathan Sidwell ---
Now I look carefully, it appears to be trying to compile libiberty.a (the
library) as a source file. Of course that'll barf.
Configured using "CXX='clang -x c++ -std=c++11' CC=clang" (Of course I didn't
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98251
nsz at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nsz at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98340
--- Comment #5 from David Binderman ---
(In reply to Nathan Sidwell from comment #4)
> Created attachment 49789 [details]
> try this
Thanks. That seemed to build ok.
> I tried building with clang, but it barfed about invalid utf8 in libiberty.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98355
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
See Also|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94021
--- Comment #8 from Martin Sebor ---
*** Bug 98281 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98281
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98357
Bug ID: 98357
Summary: Bounds check not eliminated
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: middle-end
A
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98356
Bug ID: 98356
Summary: [9/10/11 Regression] ICE in
cp_parser_dot_deref_incomplete, at cp/parser.c:7899
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98355
Bug ID: 98355
Summary: [9/10/11 Regression] ICE in has_attribute, at
c-family/c-attribs.c:5628
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98354
Bug ID: 98354
Summary: OOM: cc1plus: out of memory with operator auto
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98353
Bug ID: 98353
Summary: [9/10/11 Regression] ICE in propagate_necessity, at
tree-ssa-dce.c:1053
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98352
Bug ID: 98352
Summary: [9/10/11 Regression] ICE in implicitly_declare_fn, at
cp/method.c:2914
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94779
--- Comment #18 from Andrew Macleod ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #17)
> (In reply to Martin Liška from comment #16)
> >
> > EVRP knows the proper range:
> > 2->4 (F) x_6(D) : unsigned int [0, 1][4, 4]
>
> EVRP ATM invokes both
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98321
--- Comment #1 from Tom de Vries ---
Ok, let's first make a runnable test-case:
...
$ cat src/libgomp/testsuite/libgomp.oacc-c/test.c
#include
#define TYPE float
TYPE a = 1;
TYPE b = 2;
int
main (void)
{
printf ("A: %f\n", a);
#pragma acc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98348
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||crazylht at gmail dot com,
|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98340
--- Comment #4 from Nathan Sidwell ---
Created attachment 49789
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=49789&action=edit
try this
I tried building with clang, but it barfed about invalid utf8 in libiberty.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98335
--- Comment #1 from Michael Colavita ---
A similar problem appears to occur for the following example:
struct Data {
long a;
union {
long u;
struct {
char b;
char pad[3];
};
};
};
Data val(lon
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98351
Bug ID: 98351
Summary: [11 regression] gcc.target/powerpc/sse-andnps-1.c and
sse2-andnpd-1.c fail after r11-3308
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98350
Bug ID: 98350
Summary: Reassociation breaks FMA chains
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: missed-optimization
Severity: normal
Priority
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98269
--- Comment #5 from stli at linux dot ibm.com ---
Just as information,
I've just committed this glibc patch:
"s390x: Require GCC 7.1 or later to build glibc."
https://sourceware.org/git/?p=glibc.git;a=commit;h=844b4d8b4b937fe6943d2c0c80ce7d871cdb
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96592
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
Assi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98333
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |mpolacek at gcc dot
gnu.org
Ta
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98349
Bug ID: 98349
Summary: [11 regression] cc.target/powerpc/sse-movhps-1.c and
sse-movlps.c fail after r11-3434
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Seve
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98347
rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2020-12-17
Assig
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98348
--- Comment #1 from Daniel Han-Chen ---
I also just noticed that in GCC 10, an extra movdqa is done, which is also not
necessary.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98347
--- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Strangely, it doesn't reproduce under gdb, nor when cc1 is 64-bit binary with
-m32 -mno-sse -march=pentiumpro -mtune=pentiumpro on top of the normal test
flags.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98348
Bug ID: 98348
Summary: GCC 10.2 AVX512 Mask regression from GCC 9
Product: gcc
Version: 10.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97750
Andrew Macleod changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97750
--- Comment #8 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Andrew Macleod :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c25b504636fec7bf8f181a84af83a52757ba7e89
commit r11-6232-gc25b504636fec7bf8f181a84af83a52757ba7e89
Author: Andrew MacLeod
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98347
Bug ID: 98347
Summary: [11 Regression] gcc.dg/long_branch.c ICEs on
i686-linux
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priorit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98344
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94779
--- Comment #17 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #16)
> > The old VRP/EVRP only tracks simple ranges and anti-ranges, so can't deal
> > with
> > what you have above, the new ranger code can deal with multiple subrange
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66146
--- Comment #37 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:9f9dbc8e09cf48406aa24b6c78735f1a7912cc4e
commit r11-6229-g9f9dbc8e09cf48406aa24b6c78735f1a7912cc4e
Author: Jonathan Wakely
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98344
--- Comment #1 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:8dc63f13f03facc49b777195c9068432477b5dcd
commit r11-6228-g8dc63f13f03facc49b777195c9068432477b5dcd
Author: Jonathan Wakely
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98305
--- Comment #3 from Stephan Bergmann ---
(In reply to Martin Sebor from comment #2)
> https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2020-December/562141.html
Thanks; can confirm that fixes my LibreOffice build.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98300
--- Comment #11 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Nathan Sidwell :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:096164229a4c2d1efab9f259f50be1bdcdfc8abd
commit r11-6225-g096164229a4c2d1efab9f259f50be1bdcdfc8abd
Author: Nathan Sidwell
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98345
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Old Qt was relying on a GCC bug (as can be seen from the fact that
void
foo ()
{
for (;; ({ break; }))
;
}
has been rejected since forever). It wasn't rejected in the for nested in
another for, because
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94779
--- Comment #16 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #15)
> (In reply to Martin Liška from comment #14)
> > Ok, I've just taken look at what EVRP pass does before SWITCHCONV pass is
> > called.
> > I see that EVRP can pro
opt/compiler-explorer/gcc-trunk-20201217/bin/../libexec/gcc/x86_64-linux-gnu/11.0.0/lto-wrapper
Target: x86_64-linux-gnu
Configured with: ../gcc-trunk-20201217/configure
--prefix=/opt/compiler-explorer/gcc-build/staging --build=x86_64-linux-gnu
--host=x86_64-linux-gnu --target=x86_64-linux-gnu --disa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98343
--- Comment #3 from Pekka S ---
Hi.
Thanks.
Applied the patch to the latest trunk, built on x86_64-linux-gnu and tested
that it indeed fixes both of these test cases. Did not try on
x86_64-w64-mingw32 yet. I presume it will work just fine.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94779
--- Comment #15 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #14)
> Ok, I've just taken look at what EVRP pass does before SWITCHCONV pass is
> called.
> I see that EVRP can properly prune dead cases of a switch, but it's not
> p
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98345
--- Comment #4 from Peter Budek ---
The requested test-case:
#include
#include
int main(int argc, char *argv[])
{
QList l ;
l.append(1) ;
l.append(2) ;
l.append(3) ;
foreach(int i, l) std::cout << i << std::endl ;
re
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94779
--- Comment #14 from Martin Liška ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #12)
> So, for start I think we should do:
> 1) query->range_of_expr (m_index_range, m_index_expr, swtch)
>where query is address of gimple_ranger passed down from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90617
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||budek at wtal dot de
--- Comment #6 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98345
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|WAITING
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98345
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98340
Nathan Sidwell changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |nathan at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98345
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2020-12-17
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98345
Bug ID: 98345
Summary: Different behaviour of gcc Versions (<=8, >=9)
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98289
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:62cb9680e592057a49de66eac34da679338932f9
commit r11-6222-g62cb9680e592057a49de66eac34da679338932f9
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date: Th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98316
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
URL||https://gcc.gnu.org/piperma
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98315
--- Comment #8 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #7 from Nathan Sidwell ---
> sorry for not getting this right sooner:
>
> b7b6879f0b5: c++: Another solaris header use [PR 98315]
No worries: I've now completed Solaris 11
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98343
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2020-12-17
Status|UNCONFIRME
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98344
Bug ID: 98344
Summary: Testsuite 17_intro/headers/c++2020/stdc++.cc failure
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Componen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98333
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2020-12-17
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98343
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98332
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Summary|[10/11 Regression]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98331
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2020-12-17
CC|
1 - 100 of 129 matches
Mail list logo
