https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100289
--- Comment #18 from Joerg Wunsch ---
(In reply to rudi from comment #17)
> The issue is still there during the bootstrap build, but maybe
> --disable-gcov might help you in your cross compile toolchain too.
Yes, --disable-gcov does help as we
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100289
Joerg Wunsch changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||j at uriah dot heep.sax.de
--- Comment
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: j at uriah dot heep.sax.de
Created attachment 33286
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=33286&action=edit
Preprocessed source triggering the issue
When compiling the SVN version of avr-libc, I get the fo
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59301
Joerg Wunsch changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|CLOSED
--- Comment #3 from Joerg Wunsch -
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59301
Joerg Wunsch changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
: c
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: j at uriah dot heep.sax.de
The -fstrict-overflow behaviour can lead to surprising results. Consider
the following code that came up in a forum, complaining about why GCC
optimizes the first loop into an endless one:
int
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28718
--- Comment #13 from Joerg Wunsch 2012-09-05
15:08:27 UTC ---
All this is fighting the symptoms though.
My point (as outlined in comment #8:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28718#c8 )
is:
When operating as a C compiler, *all* user-s
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52488
Joerg Wunsch changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||j at uriah dot heep.sax.de
--- Comment
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28718
--- Comment #11 from Joerg Wunsch 2011-11-28
19:45:51 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #10)
> Jörg, could you prepare a list of functions that shall be excluded from
> libgcc?
> You can also answer to my mail "PR28718 Infos?" from 2011-11-10.
Well,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46261
--- Comment #16 from Joerg Wunsch 2011-06-28
06:30:42 UTC ---
Created attachment 24611
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24611
Fixed the filenames in the patch header.
Fixed the filenames in the patch header (there have been tw
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46261
--- Comment #15 from Joerg Wunsch 2011-06-28
06:27:17 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #14)
> > . Regardless of whether someone votes to remove an option, a segfault
> > should always be analyzed.
> Except that this is a segfault on a compiler sw
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46261
Joerg Wunsch changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||j at uriah dot heep.sax.de
--- Comment
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49487
Joerg Wunsch changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||j at uriah dot heep.sax.de
--- Comment #2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48395
--- Comment #1 from Joerg Wunsch 2011-03-31
19:13:13 UTC ---
If I unpatch r171532 from gcc/expr.c (which introduced the current
version of that piece of code), I don't get a segfault anymore but
a different ICE:
../../../../libgcc/../gcc/libgcc2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48395
Summary: [AVR] ICE: segmentation fault when compiling
libgcc2.c, SVN trunk r171783
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: major
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45261
Joerg Wunsch changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||j at uriah dot heep.sax.de
--- Comment #7
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31528
--- Comment #11 from Joerg Wunsch 2010-11-11
10:59:42 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #10)
> Can you, please, test if current mainline behave more resonably?
Well, I had to fix bug #46426 first ...
Yes, that looks good now. Compiling the origina
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46426
Summary: [avr] avr/libgcc.S in SVN r166596 fails to compile
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
AssignedTo
18 matches
Mail list logo
