https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113197
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |rguenth at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116895
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |15.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116583
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||testsuite-fail
--- Comment #5 from Ric
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116578
Bug 116578 depends on bug 115372, which changed state.
Bug 115372 Summary: [15 Regression] RISCV pr97428.c scan-tree-dump-times after
r15-812-gc71886f2ca2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115372
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115372
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116629
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116850
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||15.0
Summary|[12/13/14/15 R
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116785
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|WAITING
--- Comment #13 from Richard B
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116842
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53947
Bug 53947 depends on bug 116842, which changed state.
Bug 116842 Summary: [15 Regression] ICE definition in block follows the use
since r15-3734
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116842
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116842
--- Comment #7 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:71bf3daa8dabe45aa14e7315195a70ad0d883337
commit r15-3957-g71bf3daa8dabe45aa14e7315195a70ad0d883337
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116785
--- Comment #12 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:85f5d0642184b68b38bf3daee5a1d04b753850b1
commit r15-3956-g85f5d0642184b68b38bf3daee5a1d04b753850b1
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116850
--- Comment #5 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:64163657ba7e70347087a63bb2b32d83b52ea7d9
commit r15-3955-g64163657ba7e70347087a63bb2b32d83b52ea7d9
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116899
Bug ID: 116899
Summary: ICE: in quick_push, at vec.h:1041 with -O at _BitInt()
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
Severity: norma
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116898
Bug ID: 116898
Summary: ICE: in block_range, at gimple-range-cache.cc:1293
with -O -finstrument-functions -fnon-call-exceptions
and _BitInt()
Product: gcc
Versio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116897
Bug ID: 116897
Summary: lambda with deduced this parameter does not capture
this properly
Product: gcc
Version: 14.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116896
Bug ID: 116896
Summary: codegen for <=> compared to hand-written equivalent
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compone
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55212
--- Comment #350 from Kazumoto Kojima ---
(In reply to Oleg Endo from comment #348)
> (In reply to Oleg Endo from comment #346)
> >
> > Anyway, it seems after tightening the memory predicates and constraints,
> > some of the previously added thi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116891
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Component|c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55212
--- Comment #349 from Oleg Endo ---
(In reply to Kazumoto Kojima from comment #345)
> (In reply to Oleg Endo from comment #341)
> > Do you have any idea how that might work? The only thing I can think of
> > right now is to remove R0 from list o
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116895
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116893
--- Comment #3 from Alibek Omarov ---
It indeed looks similar, but looking at the error (sorry, forgot to post it as
well):
:37:25: error: '_Mem_Free.constprop' called on pointer returned from a
mismatched allocation function [-Werror=mismatched
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116895
Bug ID: 116895
Summary: [15 Regression] Many c++ regressions after
r15-3859-g63a598deb0c9fc for (non-arm) newlib targets
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116894
Oleg Endo changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116894
Bug ID: 116894
Summary: [SH] c++ std::cout sh-sim bus error (unaligned access)
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Comp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88853
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to David Binderman from comment #4)
That is now filed as PR 116892.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116892
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116893
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2024-09-30
Resolution|DUPLICATE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99715
Bug 99715 depends on bug 116893, which changed state.
Bug 116893 Summary: -fipa-cp-clone breaks mismatched-dealloc diagnostic
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116893
What|Removed |Added
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99715
Bug 99715 depends on bug 116893, which changed state.
Bug 116893 Summary: -fipa-cp-clone breaks mismatched-dealloc diagnostic
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116893
What|Removed |Added
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116893
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|UNCONFIRME
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110546
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||a1ba.omarov at gmail dot com
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55212
--- Comment #348 from Oleg Endo ---
(In reply to Oleg Endo from comment #346)
>
> Anyway, it seems after tightening the memory predicates and constraints,
> some of the previously added things become redundant. See follow up patch
>
> https://
54af80f55361af58e6fb1b-binutils-2.42)
15.0.0 20240929 (experimental)".
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55212
--- Comment #347 from Kazumoto Kojima ---
(In reply to Oleg Endo from comment #346)
> Right ... all the memory constraints have not been checking for the actual
> registers. Perhaps with LRA the address modifications are going through a
> differ
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116892
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88853#c4 hehe
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116892
--- Comment #2 from Sam James ---
```
enum fmt_type parse_num_range(const enum fmt_type);
enum __attribute__((packed)) fmt_type {
FMT_NUMBER_OF_FORMATS
} const parse_number___trans_tmp_1_0;
```
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116885
--- Comment #19 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Jaroslav Fojtík from comment #18)
> May be that this report points to a similar bug:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116621
>
> I cannot consider this to be a bug because of t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116885
--- Comment #18 from Jaroslav Fojtík ---
May be that this report points to a similar bug:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116621
I cannot consider this to be a bug because of types mismatch i my case.
"Normaly" the va_arg is imp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116892
--- Comment #1 from Sam James ---
Created attachment 59223
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=59223&action=edit
value-parser.i.xz
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116892
Bug ID: 116892
Summary: ICE when building pspp-1.6.2 (error: type variant
differs by TYPE_PACKED, internal compiler error:
‘verify_type’ failed)
Product: gcc
Ver
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116885
--- Comment #17 from Jaroslav Fojtík ---
The only reasonable source of this crash was that doubles are passed different
way than uint64_t. May be that doubles are newly passed through different
stack/pipe. Only looking to assembly might reveal d
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94337
--- Comment #4 from Vincent Lefèvre ---
(In reply to Vincent Lefèvre from comment #3)
> * If the effective type remains the same (a union), then using any pointer
> cast to another type would be invalid, but this could be unintuitive and
> break
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94337
--- Comment #3 from Vincent Lefèvre ---
Hmm... The code might actually be invalid, but I'm not sure. In all the
accesses, the effective type is the union type. But the C standard does not say
what happens when one takes the member of a union type
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116891
Bug ID: 116891
Summary: invalid optimization of -fma(-x,y,-z) when -03 and
-frounding-math are used
Product: gcc
Version: 14.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114056
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Assignee|unassigne
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116890
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116890
Bug ID: 116890
Summary: Heurstic for factoring out convert with one side
constant should also handle when it is a CMP
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116885
Jeffrey Walton changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||noloader at gmail dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116888
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116889
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116885
--- Comment #15 from Jaroslav Fojtík ---
When I have finished university where I has been learned C/C++ in 2000 there
was no problem to typecast uint64_t* to double* or any other type I need. We
were learned that this is correct ;).
Now I see t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116885
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||sjames at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #14 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116885
--- Comment #13 from Jaroslav Fojtík ---
Thank you for help.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116627
--- Comment #7 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:73726725ae03995ef8b61622c954f7ca70416f79
commit r15-3950-g73726725ae03995ef8b61622c954f7ca70416f79
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date: S
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116885
--- Comment #12 from Jaroslav Fojtík ---
this solution should be correct according to documentation:
typedef union
{
double d;
uint64_t u64;
} DblUint64;
case 'e':{DblUint64 du;
du.d = va_arg(ap,double);
wri
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116889
--- Comment #2 from Oliver Rosten ---
Excellent!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116885
--- Comment #11 from Vincent Lefèvre ---
(In reply to Jaroslav Fojtík from comment #9)
> Accessing to an incompatible type throug pointer is not clean in general.
> But I need here to do a dirty job to flip endianity of double type. There
> are
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116886
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116889
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||needs-bisection
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116889
Bug ID: 116889
Summary: source_location line number off-by-one when implicitly
converting to a type with a defaulted source_location
argument
Product: gcc
Versio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116885
--- Comment #10 from Jaroslav Fojtík ---
I can call 8x fwrite with 1 byte to camouflage this. It will produce slower and
longer code and type punning will be only hidden. I cannot avoid this shuffle.
// Needed to store double in LoE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116886
--- Comment #4 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Thomas Koenig from comment #2)
> The behavior for simplification is correct, as far as I understand:
>
> $ cat mv2.f90
> program memain
> integer, dimension(0,0), parameter :: empt
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116887
--- Comment #5 from Xi Ruoyao ---
(Also an interesting trivia: the HPPA PR number is 52999 and the attachment
number is 59222.)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116887
Xi Ruoyao changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||loongarch64-linux-gnu
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116885
--- Comment #9 from Jaroslav Fojtík ---
https://wiki.sei.cmu.edu/confluence/display/c/EXP39-C.+Do+not+access+a+variable+through+a+pointer+of+an+incompatible+type
Accessing to an incompatible type throug pointer is not clean in general. But I
ne
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116858
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|REOPENED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116858
--- Comment #7 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Sam James :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:f4d0c6acc0ef43d7971f2d53afaa64ca05fb4718
commit r15-3949-gf4d0c6acc0ef43d7971f2d53afaa64ca05fb4718
Author: Sam James
Date: Sun Sep 2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116888
Bug ID: 116888
Summary: Incorrect lazy substitution into unevaluated context
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compon
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116801
Mikael Morin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |mikael at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116886
--- Comment #3 from Mikael Morin ---
(In reply to Thomas Koenig from comment #0)
> If I read J3/23-007 16.9.138 correctly, the following program should
> print the minimum integer value, twice, but it prints nothing:
>
> program memain
> impl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116885
Vincent Lefèvre changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vincent-gcc at vinc17 dot net
--- Com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116806
--- Comment #3 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jeff Law :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:0cd24b06d130d99bd86e5e03a01c38047413a92e
commit r15-3947-g0cd24b06d130d99bd86e5e03a01c38047413a92e
Author: Mikael Pettersson
Date: Su
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116887
--- Comment #3 from Florian Weimer ---
Created attachment 59222
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=59222&action=edit
bug.i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116887
Xi Ruoyao changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||xry111 at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108038
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108038
--- Comment #2 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jeff Law :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a0f1f504b2c49a3695b91d3323d2e2419ef970db
commit r15-3946-ga0f1f504b2c49a3695b91d3323d2e2419ef970db
Author: Jovan Vukic
Date: Sun Sep
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82209
Florian Weimer changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||fw at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #8 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55212
--- Comment #346 from Oleg Endo ---
(In reply to Kazumoto Kojima from comment #343)
>
> Yes. The wrong instruction
>
> mov.b @(5,fpul),r0! 517 [c=2 l=2] *movqi/8
>
> is generated with *movqi insn which is defined by
>
> (define
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116887
--- Comment #1 from Florian Weimer ---
Seen with: gcc version 13.3.1 20240929 [releases/gcc-13 3fdb1fd69] (GCC)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116887
Bug ID: 116887
Summary: Section type conflict on loongarch with .data.rel.ro
section attribute
Product: gcc
Version: 13.3.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: norma
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116885
--- Comment #7 from Jaroslav Fojtík ---
Just for clarification.
This worked till GCC-14 - The code has been verified and proven functionable
many times:
case 'e':{const uint64_t e = va_arg(ap,uint64_t);
writed+=WrQWORD_LoEnd(
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116885
Jaroslav Fojtík changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116886
--- Comment #2 from Thomas Koenig ---
The behavior for simplification is correct, as far as I understand:
$ cat mv2.f90
program memain
integer, dimension(0,0), parameter :: empty = reshape([(0,i=1,0)],[0,0])
print *,maxval(empty)
print *,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116885
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|ABI |
--- Comment #5 from Thomas Koenig ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116885
--- Comment #4 from Thomas Koenig ---
(In reply to Jaroslav Fojtík from comment #3)
> It seems to me that this problem has something to do with memcpy optimised
> for AVX, that newly requests everything to be alligned.
As shown by the valgrind
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116886
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116885
--- Comment #3 from Jaroslav Fojtík ---
It seems to me that this problem has something to do with memcpy optimised for
AVX, that newly requests everything to be alligned.
--
<<>> (c)1998-2024
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116886
Bug ID: 116886
Summary: maxval/minval should not return empty result for empty
array
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116880
--- Comment #6 from Sergei Trofimovich ---
(In reply to Iain Sandoe from comment #5)
> Created attachment 59220 [details]
> patch under test
>
> Here is what I'm testing - if you have a chance to test it in your scenario
> that would be great.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116885
--- Comment #2 from Jaroslav Fojtík ---
May be that I did something wrong, but this code worked for 20 years without
any problem. It has been also tested unded Borland and VisualStudio without any
notable problem.
I have noted problem only for
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116885
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116884
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |13.4
Summary|Bogus strcpy -W
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116885
Bug ID: 116885
Summary: Wrong functionality of vararg causes malfunction or
crashes
Product: gcc
Version: 14.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116884
Bug ID: 116884
Summary: Bogus strcpy -Warray-bounds warning following memset
of destination after r13-455
Product: gcc
Version: 13.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Seve
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116880
--- Comment #5 from Iain Sandoe ---
Created attachment 59220
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=59220&action=edit
patch under test
Here is what I'm testing - if you have a chance to test it in your scenario
that would be great
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116880
Iain Sandoe changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|2024-09-28 00
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116880
--- Comment #3 from Sergei Trofimovich ---
Bisected it down to r15-3146-g47dbd69b1b31d3.
The real test is a bit involved as it requires a running an installtestsuite,
relies on boehm-gc and an interpreter language on top if it. I build it as:
98 matches
Mail list logo
