https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107409
--- Comment #23 from Rama Malladi ---
(In reply to Rama Malladi from comment #22)
> I will close this issue as we were unable to reproduce the perf drop going
> from gcc-7 to gcc-8 on a Graviton2 based instance. The performance of
> 519.lbm_r bu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107409
--- Comment #22 from Rama Malladi ---
I will close this issue as we were unable to reproduce the perf drop going from
gcc-7 to gcc-8 on a Graviton2 based instance. The performance of 519.lbm_r
built with gcc-7.4 was same as that with gcc-8.5.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107769
Xionghu Luo (luoxhu at gcc dot gnu.org) changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||yinyuefengyi a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109282
--- Comment #5 from Chris Johns ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #4)
> My bet if you do /bin/sh you would also get into trouble too ...
I do not think it is /bin/sh but you are right with the link bring MacOS
blocking an exe that sho
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105452
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jason at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109326
--- Comment #6 from Steve Thompson ---
(In reply to Steve Thompson from comment #5)
> 18 16 32
> 64B code:
>
> 1.2K code:
Sorry, my touchpad glitched and sent prematurely.
For the overlarge vectorized version I hate:
[28] n
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109326
--- Comment #5 from Steve Thompson ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #4)
> (In reply to Steve Thompson from comment #3)
> > However I don't understand why olock_reset_op() is so large. It's
> > a trivial initializer for a descriptor w
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109192
--- Comment #15 from chenglulu ---
(In reply to Andrew Macleod from comment #14)
> The upcoming patch for 109274 should resolve this.
The problem has been solved. Thanks!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109051
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
aprofile is 10 multilibs and rmprofile is 21 multilibs.
so 31 multilibs in total (if I counted correctly).
that is a lot of building in general.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109242
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.3
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wak
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109242
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:ee122a2eeaea2ffec0e32577c7372bd4e2289e11
commit r13-6937-gee122a2eeaea2ffec0e32577c7372bd4e2289e11
Author: Jonathan Wakely
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109340
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Gah, wrong ID in that commit message.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109340
--- Comment #1 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:31a909712014b75fc6ae2ca5eaa425f218bb5f32
commit r13-6934-g31a909712014b75fc6ae2ca5eaa425f218bb5f32
Author: Jonathan Wakely
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105273
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109154
--- Comment #40 from Andrew Macleod ---
> There is no problem with adding --params, and those are always better than
> magic numbers.
>
> Btw, I originally wondered why we don't re-compute zone1_12 because it's
> in the imports of the successo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109303
--- Comment #5 from Martin Jambor ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #4)
> --- gcc/ipa-cp.cc.jj 2023-03-14 19:12:19.949553036 +0100
> +++ gcc/ipa-cp.cc 2023-03-29 18:32:34.14423 +0200
> @@ -3117,7 +3117,9 @@ propagate_aggs_acro
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109322
--- Comment #8 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Steve Kargl from comment #7)
> On Wed, Mar 29, 2023 at 09:28:38PM +, pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109322
> >
> > --- Comment #5 from An
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109322
--- Comment #7 from Steve Kargl ---
On Wed, Mar 29, 2023 at 09:28:38PM +, pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109322
>
> --- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
> There is a bug with -m32 and fc-p
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109322
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski ---
diff --git a/gcc/fortran/dump-parse-tree.cc b/gcc/fortran/dump-parse-tree.cc
index 3b24bdc1a6c..7869130ac2b 100644
--- a/gcc/fortran/dump-parse-tree.cc
+++ b/gcc/fortran/dump-parse-tree.cc
@@ -3697,6 +3697,8
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109322
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
There is a bug with -m32 and fc-prototypes though, it should be long long
rather than long long. Let me provide a patch for that.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109242
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Assignee|unassig
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109322
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108713
--- Comment #3 from Thomas Schwinge ---
(Possibly?) similarly now with GCC sources based on 2023-03-28 commit
b3c5933ee726004e4e47291d422dfe7ac3345062, with a bunch of local OMP changes on
top (but those shouldn't be touching the relevant area o
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109340
Bug ID: 109340
Summary: Inconsistent diagnostics for invalid member types in
union
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: diagnostic
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109339
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||11.3.1
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109339
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109337
Richard Smith changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||richard-gccbugzilla@metafoo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109339
Bug ID: 109339
Summary: stop_token compiled with -Og yields
maybe-uninitialized
Product: gcc
Version: 12.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pri
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109322
--- Comment #3 from Steve Kargl ---
On Wed, Mar 29, 2023 at 05:50:05PM +, emr-gnu at hev dot psu.edu wrote:
>
>
> Extending my original demonstrator, if you add a "INTEGER(KIND=C_INT64_T) ::
> E", you get the following output:
>
> > gfort
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108733
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108704
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106325
--- Comment #10 from David Malcolm ---
Should be fixed on gcc 12 branch by the above (for the eventual gcc 12.3
release).
Still affects GCC 11 and GCC 10.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107582
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107345
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108562
Bug 108562 depends on bug 107345, which changed state.
Bug 107345 Summary: -Wanalyzer-null-dereference false positive with giving
weird path infomation
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107345
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105784
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109094
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109337
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|NEW
Resolution|INVALID
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109337
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |INVALID
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109337
--- Comment #3 from Christopher Di Bella ---
This is apparently a Clang bug: the RHS of `R42c` isn't evaluated because of
short-circuiting. Apologies for the noise and thanks for helping me work
through it.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109338
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Testcase:
```
template
concept C = true;
template
struct A {};
void f(A auto >) {}
```
Please place the testcase in the comment or attach it; don't just link to
godbolt.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100248
Arthur O'Dwyer changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||arthur.j.odwyer at gmail dot
com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109337
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
Reduced testcase:
```
template concept A42b = true;
template concept R42c = A42b;
static_assert (R42c);
```
GCC does the right thing for too:
```
template bool A42b = true;
template concept R42c = A42
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109338
Bug ID: 109338
Summary: `S auto>` isn't valid C++20
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Ass
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109337
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109337
Bug ID: 109337
Summary: c++2a test concepts4.C passes when it should fail
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compon
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103559
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #7
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103559
--- Comment #6 from Jeremy R. ---
Thanks!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109328
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |13.0
Summary|Build fail in R
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109094
--- Comment #11 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-12 branch has been updated by David Malcolm
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:7903e0bca003840751c109cfa41e5a1528ece12a
commit r12-9367-g7903e0bca003840751c109cfa41e5a1528ece12a
Author: David Malcolm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109328
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
Created attachment 54788
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=54788&action=edit
Patch which improves the depedencies
Note I am not 100% sure this is all the way. But you should get the idea
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108733
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-12 branch has been updated by David Malcolm
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:98558117ba870d47398927f2066e469e47f39c16
commit r12-9365-g98558117ba870d47398927f2066e469e47f39c16
Author: David Malcolm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106325
--- Comment #9 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-12 branch has been updated by David Malcolm
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:02fbda165b74179469d9eae436fed613aa6a6ebb
commit r12-9362-g02fbda165b74179469d9eae436fed613aa6a6ebb
Author: David Malcolm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108968
--- Comment #19 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-12 branch has been updated by David Malcolm
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:833d822ff0e83478a4fe536d55dfb22cde8ddc40
commit r12-9366-g833d822ff0e83478a4fe536d55dfb22cde8ddc40
Author: David Malcolm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107948
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-12 branch has been updated by David Malcolm
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a7cc8ecefb72f06368b055fa60f5a2ff2eb6dfdb
commit r12-9360-ga7cc8ecefb72f06368b055fa60f5a2ff2eb6dfdb
Author: David Malcolm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108704
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-12 branch has been updated by David Malcolm
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:5da2126c4df8d83c2b2f9de7bb393ab4f5832840
commit r12-9364-g5da2126c4df8d83c2b2f9de7bb393ab4f5832840
Author: David Malcolm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105784
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-12 branch has been updated by David Malcolm
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:1c66f1c6d69dbe0a855f7adb61df8d92ca523899
commit r12-9359-g1c66f1c6d69dbe0a855f7adb61df8d92ca523899
Author: David Malcolm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107345
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-12 branch has been updated by David Malcolm
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:111fb5d3cafd0f7f2a0d01aa9e1213013fa0cc83
commit r12-9357-g111fb5d3cafd0f7f2a0d01aa9e1213013fa0cc83
Author: David Malcolm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107582
--- Comment #11 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-12 branch has been updated by David Malcolm
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e7f7483d50069fede8450091449714d122c58fca
commit r12-9358-ge7f7483d50069fede8450091449714d122c58fca
Author: David Malcolm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106573
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-12 branch has been updated by David Malcolm
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c63e5a234d0193e1f41024cf0eee840998e04c7f
commit r12-9355-gc63e5a234d0193e1f41024cf0eee840998e04c7f
Author: David Malcolm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106573
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-12 branch has been updated by David Malcolm
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:62a565e56763c65ec9e134735aa780cf2b1c3cfa
commit r12-9354-g62a565e56763c65ec9e134735aa780cf2b1c3cfa
Author: David Malcolm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109322
--- Comment #2 from Eric Reischer ---
I can't point to a specific standard that says, "thou shalt generate output
with these types..."; it's more of a "we probably should be doing this"-type
thing. If you are compiling Fortran and C on the same
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91645
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||llvm at rifkin dot dev
--- Comment #10
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103559
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91645
--- Comment #9 from Aldy Hernandez ---
It looks like what we want for this test is actually !isgreaterequal() not
isless(), since we want to exclude the possibility of a NAN. Like this:
float test (float x)
{
if (!__builtin_isgreaterequal (x,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107396
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109322
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
Priorit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59498
--- Comment #22 from ncm at cantrip dot org ---
CWG 1430 seems to be about disallowing a construct that requires capturing an
alias declaration into a name mangling. This bug and at least some of those
referred to it do not ask for any such action
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109336
Gaius Mulley changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109303
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
--- gcc/ipa-cp.cc.jj2023-03-14 19:12:19.949553036 +0100
+++ gcc/ipa-cp.cc 2023-03-29 18:32:34.14423 +0200
@@ -3117,7 +3117,9 @@ propagate_aggs_across_jump_function (str
{
HOST
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109315
Gaius Mulley changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109315
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Gaius Mulley :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:3be4e43a6a0f429648ea188c8e110b74268fed27
commit r13-6931-g3be4e43a6a0f429648ea188c8e110b74268fed27
Author: Gaius Mulley
Date: Wed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109336
--- Comment #1 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Gaius Mulley :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:3be4e43a6a0f429648ea188c8e110b74268fed27
commit r13-6931-g3be4e43a6a0f429648ea188c8e110b74268fed27
Author: Gaius Mulley
Date: Wed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109303
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
And the problem is similar to PR108605, most of IPA uses unsigned int as type
for byte offsets and while some spots check for offsets while bit offsets are
typically using HOST_WIDE_INT. So, some larger bit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108896
--- Comment #34 from Martin Uecker ---
Created attachment 54787
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=54787&action=edit
patch for C FE to add size expressions to VM types in structs
Here is a preliminary patch for C FE just to s
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109331
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Target Milestone|--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109283
--- Comment #2 from ncm at cantrip dot org ---
Betting this one is fixed by deleting code.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109303
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109231
--- Comment #27 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Thanks. It is a mystery so far :(.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109231
--- Comment #26 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #25 from Jakub Jelinek ---
> (In reply to r...@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de from comment #24)
>> > --- Comment #23 from Jakub Jelinek ---
>> [...]
>> So far, I've tried both
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109231
--- Comment #25 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to r...@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de from comment #24)
> > --- Comment #23 from Jakub Jelinek ---
> [...]
> > Perhaps try to undo my patch in a different way, like
> > --- gcc/tree-inline.cc 2023-03
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109213
--- Comment #8 from Jan Hubicka ---
We have large-stack-frame-growth that is relative, so yes, increasing stack
size of caller makes gcc to think that it is heavy and making it event heavier
will not hurt that much.
We originally ran into stack
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109231
--- Comment #24 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #23 from Jakub Jelinek ---
[...]
> Perhaps try to undo my patch in a different way, like
> --- gcc/tree-inline.cc 2023-03-17 18:59:50.226199917 +0100
> +++ gcc/tree-inli
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109336
Gaius Mulley changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109336
Bug ID: 109336
Summary: The -fmod= and -fdef= options do not work.
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: modul
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109335
Bug ID: 109335
Summary: -Wanalyzer-malloc-leak false positives and false
negatives
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109324
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109319
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106008
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Keywords|missed-optimizat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106511
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||12.2.0
--- Comment #4 from Richard Bie
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109310
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Martin Liska :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:8b2766e87dbf0d20808bc92d8e6ee7f876d19ab2
commit r13-6929-g8b2766e87dbf0d20808bc92d8e6ee7f876d19ab2
Author: Martin Liska
Date: Wed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109310
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109330
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108865
--- Comment #33 from Costas Argyris ---
It should be noted that with the current implementation, windres (part of
binutils) is mandatory when building for the mingw (Windows) hosts, both 32 and
64-bit versions.
That is, a build failure will occ
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108865
--- Comment #32 from Costas Argyris ---
Followed by:
https://gcc.gnu.org/git/?p=gcc.git;a=commitdiff;h=e70e36cbef4f01e7d32bafe17698c3bf3e4624b8
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108865
--- Comment #31 from Costas Argyris ---
This was initially done only for the 64-bit mingw Windows host
(x86_64-*-mingw*).
This is the patch that extended it to the 32-bit version as well
(i[34567]86-*-mingw32*):
https://gcc.gnu.org/git/?p=gcc.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109331
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109331
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:86efc490ab86bfa00720479b4714da23cd7df797
commit r13-6928-g86efc490ab86bfa00720479b4714da23cd7df797
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109319
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Summary|[13 Regression] I
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107561
--- Comment #24 from Richard Biener ---
Created attachment 54784
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=54784&action=edit
another hack
1 - 100 of 132 matches
Mail list logo
