https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119142
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Status|N
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119142
--- Comment #8 from H.J. Lu ---
Created attachment 60673
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=60673&action=edit
A patch
I am testing this with
if (GENERAL_REGNO_P (hard_regno))
{
/* push is 1 byte while typical spil
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119145
--- Comment #1 from Tamar Christina ---
The vectorizer seems confused. Vectorization fails, but seems to fail during
SLP transform so the ifc loop is kept, but the statements not transformed.
it then produces broken SSA:
note: * Analysis
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119142
--- Comment #7 from H.J. Lu ---
Something like
diff --git a/gcc/config/i386/i386.cc b/gcc/config/i386/i386.cc
index 661e71b032c..8e599bb22fc 100644
--- a/gcc/config/i386/i386.cc
+++ b/gcc/config/i386/i386.cc
@@ -20613,11 +20613,10 @@ ix86_calle
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88443
Bug 88443 depends on bug 113515, which changed state.
Bug 113515 Summary: Wrong documentation for -Wstringop-overflow
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113515
What|Removed |Added
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119141
--- Comment #5 from Nikl Kelbon ---
(In reply to Sam James from comment #3)
> (In reply to Nikl Kelbon from comment #2)
> > This is not a bug about the difference in behavior of different compilers.
> > Of course they will behave the same, they
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119142
--- Comment #6 from Hongtao Liu ---
(In reply to Haochen Jiang from comment #5)
> (In reply to Haochen Jiang from comment #4)
> > I suppose that patch should be reverted, caused by Richard S's patch.
> >
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-re
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119142
Haochen Jiang changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||haochen.jiang at intel dot com
--- Comm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119142
--- Comment #4 from Haochen Jiang ---
I suppose that patch should be reverted, caused by Richard S's patch.
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-regression/2025-March/081825.html
(I almost thought my script went buggy and needed to shut down toda
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119142
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2025-03-07
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119141
--- Comment #2 from Nikl Kelbon ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> ```
> #include
> #include
>
> [[gnu::noinline,gnu::noipa]]
> void sink(auto)
> {}
>
> int main() {
> std::chrono::milliseconds ms = std::chrono::millisecon
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60440
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
URL||https://gcc.gnu.org/piperma
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113515
sandra at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113515
--- Comment #1 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Sandra Loosemore :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:888e70b322622528dac17f04738ffa232c6fb82d
commit r15-7877-g888e70b322622528dac17f04738ffa232c6fb82d
Author: Sandra Loosemore
Dat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119141
--- Comment #4 from Nikl Kelbon ---
(In reply to Sam James from comment #3)
> (In reply to Nikl Kelbon from comment #2)
> > This is not a bug about the difference in behavior of different compilers.
> > Of course they will behave the same, they
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119114
--- Comment #2 from Li Pan ---
Tweak test case for easy locating.
1 │ int b[18];
2 │ long long al;
3 │ _Bool e;
4 │ char f = 010;
5 │ short t[18];
6 │
7 │ unsigned w[8][18][18][18];
8 │ _Bool a;
9 │
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119141
--- Comment #3 from Sam James ---
(In reply to Nikl Kelbon from comment #2)
> This is not a bug about the difference in behavior of different compilers.
> Of course they will behave the same, they have the same standard libraries
> and sanitizer
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119154
Bug ID: 119154
Summary: GCC 15.0 std module with compiled with -O3
breaks when loaded with -O0 (not -O1, -O2 and -Ofast)
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119114
--- Comment #3 from Li Pan ---
The related asm looks abnormal up to a point, there should be a reduce insn for
a but actually not, the insn and flow may looks like below.
114 │1028c: cc847057vsetivlizero,8,e16,m1,ta,ma
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119153
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[14/15 regression] Static |Static storage for
|s
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119153
--- Comment #2 from Zhihao Yuan ---
Regression or not, if -fmerge-all-constants is acceptable, P2752 wouldn't
exist:
https://godbolt.org/z/TTfbj7jjE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119153
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|14.3|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119153
Sam James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[14 Regression] Static |[14/15 regression] Static
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114978
--- Comment #26 from chenglulu ---
(In reply to Tianyang Chou from comment #24)
> (In reply to Chen Chen from comment #0)
>
> Sorry to talk about something unrelated to this bug. I tried running 548 on
> CPU loongson 3A6000 with the same compil
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119153
Bug ID: 119153
Summary: [14 Regression] Static storage for initializer_list no
longer shares with array literals
Product: gcc
Version: 14.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114978
Tianyang Zhou changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tianyang.chou at gmail dot com
--- Comm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114978
--- Comment #25 from Tianyang Zhou ---
Btw, I use the latest AOSC and the system default GCC is 14.2.0 20240801
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119141
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |INVALID
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119143
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://github.com/llvm/llv
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119145
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Mil
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119146
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119150
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2025-03-07
Summary|Optimizat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119136
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2025-03-07
Assignee|unassigne
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119151
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |13.4
Summary|unwind-dw2-btre
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119151
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||EH
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49508
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||manu at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #10
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60440
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.5
Known to fail|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60440
--- Comment #14 from Andrew Pinski ---
Looks like this is similarlly a regression like PR 49508 was too.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60440
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63517
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|FIXED |DUPLICATE
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99974
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2025-03-06
Status|UNCONFIRME
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63517
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||4.9.4
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60440
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||msebor at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100365
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|stmt-expr |
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119149
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119150
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119149
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|DUPLICATE |---
Status|RESOLVED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26724
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||barry.revzin at gmail dot com
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105698
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119138
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112296
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119150
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
I am not even sure this is not incorrect.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119136
--- Comment #5 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
F2023 still has:
12.12 Restrictions on input/output statements
(2) An input/output statement that is executed while another input/output
statement is being executed is a recursive input/output
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119136
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112960
sandra at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||sandra at gcc dot gnu.org
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119099
--- Comment #10 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jeff Law :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:aef04968cfba0feb4420d96c61f766ee6c73f957
commit r15-7874-gaef04968cfba0feb4420d96c61f766ee6c73f957
Author: Alexey Merzlyakov
Date: T
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117029
sandra at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|FIXED |---
Status|RESOL
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119099
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119118
--- Comment #8 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:ac8a70db59ac309daf866a65b5785e472e76d406
commit r15-7873-gac8a70db59ac309daf866a65b5785e472e76d406
Author: Harald Anlauf
Date: T
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91388
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |pinskia at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98533
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119136
--- Comment #4 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
For info: NAG generates the following runtime error:
Runtime Error: pr119136.f90, line 8: Recursive I/O on unit 6
Program terminated by fatal error
Abort
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91388
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91388
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
*** Bug 119149 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119136
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119149
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Hmm, I don't think it's a dup.
In bug 91388 control really does seem to flow off the end (it's just that the
function can never be called at all). Here there is clearly a call to a
noreturn function so th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119118
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |anlauf at gcc dot
gnu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119152
Bug ID: 119152
Summary: [C++26] P3019R14 indirect and polymorphic: Vocabulary
Types for Composite Class Design
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119151
Michael Leuchtenburg changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #60671|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119152
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |redi at gcc dot gnu.org
Ev
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119151
--- Comment #1 from Michael Leuchtenburg ---
Created attachment 60671
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=60671&action=edit
the fix I described
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119151
Bug ID: 119151
Summary: unwind-dw2-btree maintains separators wrong
Product: gcc
Version: 14.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: li
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119099
--- Comment #8 from Alexey Merzlyakov ---
Oops... It looks like we've submitted the patch in maillist in parallel two
times.
;
}
constexpr bool isconstant()
{
return std::is_constant_evaluated();
}
int main()
{
// Tested via godbolt.org using the following compilers/flags:
// GCC x86-64 -std=c++20 (13.3.0, 14.1.0, and 15.0.1 20250306)
// Clang x86-64 -std=c++20 (head)
// MSVC x64 /std:c++20 (head
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119149
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119149
Bug ID: 119149
Summary: Bogus "control reaches end of non-void function"
warning with ill-formed expression on RHS of comma
operator
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99538
--- Comment #3 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Simon Martin :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:be0942afb3a7080b7b0420a5369bdcf3dcc74b52
commit r15-7872-gbe0942afb3a7080b7b0420a5369bdcf3dcc74b52
Author: Simon Martin
Date: Thu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119099
--- Comment #9 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
No worries on the dual submission. If that's the biggest problem I have to
deal with today, I'll consider it a good day.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118922
--- Comment #17 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #16)
> For #c14 it was actually (at -O2)
> r12-5300-gf98f373dd822b35c52356b753d528924e9f89678
Then this should fix it:
```
[apinski@xeond2 gcc]$ git diff ../../gcc/t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118922
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |pinskia at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118922
--- Comment #14 from Andrew Pinski ---
Created attachment 60669
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=60669&action=edit
Gimple testcase
This gimple testcase started to fail between GCC 11 and 12.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118922
--- Comment #16 from Jakub Jelinek ---
For #c14 it was actually (at -O2)
r12-5300-gf98f373dd822b35c52356b753d528924e9f89678
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118924
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118922
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[13/14/15 regression] |[12/13/14/15 regression]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118999
--- Comment #1 from Wilco ---
Thanks for the reproducer, confirmed. It is hard to blame this on scheduling
since the difference is almost exclusively due to a huge increase of branch
mispredictions. The basic block layout is oddly different in t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119136
kargls at comcast dot net changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kargls at comcast dot net
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119148
Bug ID: 119148
Summary: Inconsistent -Wstringop-truncation warning when using
strncpy
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119147
Bug ID: 119147
Summary: 525.x264_r is approx. slower with LTO+PGO than without
(at -Ofast -march-native)
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Seve
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38768
Wilco changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||wilco at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #11 from Wi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38768
--- Comment #10 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Wilco Dijkstra :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:f870302515d5fcf7355f0108c3ead0038ff326fd
commit r15-7871-gf870302515d5fcf7355f0108c3ead0038ff326fd
Author: Wilco Dijkstra
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118351
--- Comment #5 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Wilco Dijkstra :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:f870302515d5fcf7355f0108c3ead0038ff326fd
commit r15-7871-gf870302515d5fcf7355f0108c3ead0038ff326fd
Author: Wilco Dijkstra
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118999
Wilco changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||wilco at gcc dot gnu.org
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98533
--- Comment #18 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:179e01085b0aed111ef1f7908c4b87c800f880e9
commit r15-7870-g179e01085b0aed111ef1f7908c4b87c800f880e9
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date: T
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118922
--- Comment #13 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Andrew Macleod from comment #12)
> Hmm. Going into phiopt2, I see:
> and PHIOPT2 says:
>
> COND_EXPR in block 5 and PHI in block 7 converted to straightline code.
> Merging blocks 4 and 6
> R
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119123
--- Comment #8 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:179e01085b0aed111ef1f7908c4b87c800f880e9
commit r15-7870-g179e01085b0aed111ef1f7908c4b87c800f880e9
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date: T
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119138
--- Comment #2 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:0ba3e5ff14a48f1fb7ca53cb86194e08d5b5da66
commit r15-7869-g0ba3e5ff14a48f1fb7ca53cb86194e08d5b5da66
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date: T
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114052
vvinayag at arm dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vvinayag at arm dot com
--- Co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116125
--- Comment #5 from Richard Sandiford ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #3)
> We document
>
> class dr_with_seg_len
> {
> ...
> /* The minimum common alignment of DR's start address, SEG_LEN and
> ACCESS_SIZE. */
> unsign
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119142
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
So perhaps just do
return mem_cost > 2 ? mem_cost - 2 : 1;
instead of the assert and returning mem_cost - 2; ?
Or keep the assert, but let the 2 new x86 target hooks just return
default_callee_save_cos
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118068
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #7
1 - 100 of 185 matches
Mail list logo
