https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82457
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82457
--- Comment #12 from Martin Liška ---
Author: marxin
Date: Thu Mar 8 08:52:39 2018
New Revision: 258356
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=258356&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backport r254137
2018-03-08 Martin Liska
Backport from mainl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82457
--- Comment #11 from Martin Liška ---
Author: marxin
Date: Tue Nov 21 19:03:11 2017
New Revision: 255028
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=255028&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Backport r254137
2017-11-21 Martin Liska
Backport from mainl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82457
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||8.0
Known to fail|8.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82457
--- Comment #9 from Martin Liška ---
Author: marxin
Date: Fri Oct 27 08:34:56 2017
New Revision: 254137
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=254137&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Document --coverage and fork-like functions (PR gcov-profile/82457).
2017
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82457
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82457
--- Comment #7 from Mikhail Maltsev ---
I meant libgcov
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82457
--- Comment #6 from Mikhail Maltsev ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #5)
> Well fork and exec does not need to be the semantics of POSIX says it it.
> So warning is not a good idea.
But don't libgcc wrappers already rely on those sem
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82457
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|diagnostic |
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82457
Mikhail Maltsev changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82457
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Andrew Schepler from comment #2)
> I don't follow your explanation. In standard-compliant mode, the compiler
> isn't allowed to change the behavior of a function because it's NOT specifed
> by a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82457
Andrew Schepler changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||aschepler at gmail dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82457
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||documentation
Status|UNCONFI
13 matches
Mail list logo
