https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59782
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59782
--- Comment #7 from Andrew Pinski ---
#if (GCC_VERSION >= 4005) && (__GNUC__ >= 5 || !defined(__PIC__)) &&
(defined(__i386__) || defined(__x86_64__)) && !(defined(__sun__) &&
defined(__svr4__))
I don't know if this is not that important with the
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59782
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Perhaps, but that is not sufficient, if you don't bootstrap the compiler, then
it will still be likely optimized build by the (system?) compiler.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59782
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski ---
Isn't it better to disable this code when not optimizing so that stage 1 is
never miscompiled?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59782
--- Comment #4 from Michael Deutschmann ---
> According to [1], 4.7.1 is already OK, so > 4007 should be enough.
But 4.7.0 isn't OK, so >= 4007 isn't enough. (> 4007 is functionally
equivalent to >= 4008.)
Note that this does make fixing 4.7.4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59782
--- Comment #3 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #2)
> I'd say for GCC 4.8 we should just replace the conditional with GCC_VERSION
> >= 4008 and for 4.9 with >= 4009, better trust only the latest version for
> target att
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59782
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59782
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||build
Status|UNCONFIRMED
