--- Additional Comments From fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-18
08:44 ---
The problem is in the different behavior of ftruncate on /dev/null:
$ cat a.c
#include
#include
#include
#include
int main (void)
{
int fd = open ("/dev/null", O_RDWR);
ftruncate (fd, 0);
prin
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-18
08:51 ---
Subject: Bug 22103
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-06-18 08:51:44
Modified files:
gcc: ChangeLog tree-sra.c
Added files:
--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-18 08:58
---
Fixed.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
--- Additional Comments From enok at lysator dot liu dot se 2005-06-18
09:08 ---
The problem seems to appear with pointer declaration to a derived type with any
kind of member initialization. The following code fails too:
SUBROUTINE N
TYPE T
INTEGER :: I = 0
END TYPE T
TYPE(T)
When running the testsuite for GCC 4.0.1 RC 2
(http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2005-06/msg01068.html)
I get the following error:
FAIL: abi_check
The above testsuite failure does not occur with
GCC 4.0-20050616 snapshot
(http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2005-06/msg01025.html)
--
--
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[4.0 Regression] libstdc+++ |[4.0 Regression] libstdc++
|ABI |ABI
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/sh
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever Confirmed||1
Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2005-06-
--- Additional Comments From steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-18
10:42 ---
Investigating...
--
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |stev
--- Additional Comments From giovannibajo at libero dot it 2005-06-18
10:43 ---
Confirmed. Not fixed by RTH's recent patch to fix vectorizer failures, but
still most likely related to Honza's patch to kill RBI.
--
What|Removed |Added
Stevenb noticed another fallout from Nathan's alias warning patch:
../../mainline/gcc/config/i386/linux-unwind.h: In
function 'x86_64_fallback_frame_state':
../../mainline/gcc/config/i386/linux-unwind.h:55: warning: dereferencing type-
punned pointer will break strict-aliasing rules
This can be
--- Additional Comments From steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-18
11:34 ---
Honza messed up.
--
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|steven at gcc dot gnu dot |hubi
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-18
11:52 ---
Subject: Bug 22035
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-06-18 11:51:48
Modified files:
gcc/testsuite : ChangeLog
Added files:
gcc/t
There is a buffer overflow error in GCJ while reading in large FP literals, as
shown by Jacks testcase 3.10.2-round-6 (and others). On my machine, this
manifests itself only when "parse.y" or "lex.c" is recompiled at -O0 after a
full bootstrap, like so:
cd $GCC_SRC_DIR/gcc/java
touch parse.y
--- Additional Comments From rmathew at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-18
12:11 ---
Created an attachment (id=9107)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=9107&action=view)
Jacks testcase 3.10.2-round-6 that demonstrates this problem.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bu
--
What|Removed |Added
Component|c |target
GCC target triplet||x86_64-linux-gnu
Version|unknown
--- Additional Comments From abilalh at yahoo dot com 2005-06-18 12:57
---
(In reply to comment #5)
> (In reply to comment #4)
> Yes you have to recompile GCC/GCJ.
i recomplie gcc4.0 with --enable-java-awt=gtk configure option but it gave error
on make bootstrap command that gtk version
--- Additional Comments From nathan at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-18
13:04 ---
can someone send me the .i file and/or sys/ucontext.h, I don't have an x86-64
system available.
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-18
13:26 ---
Subject: Bug 22083
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-06-18 13:26:20
Modified files:
gcc: ChangeLog
gcc/config/rs6000:
--- Additional Comments From giovannibajo at libero dot it 2005-06-18
13:48 ---
I see this also on 4.1.0 20050617.
--
What|Removed |Added
CC|
--
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |critical
Target Milestone|--- |4.0.1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22
--- Additional Comments From laurent at guerby dot net 2005-06-18 13:51
---
Now 5 tests with this ICE.
+===GNAT BUG DETECTED==+
| 4.1.0 20050618 (experimental) (x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu) GCC error: |
| tree check: expected
The code in the attached file is correct (Comeau 4.3.0.1 agrees with me), but
g++ reports an error:
doxybug.cpp:13: error: too few template-parameter-lists
--
Summary: Incorrect diagnostic for specialization of a nested
class template
Product: gcc
--- Additional Comments From cpp at tempest-sw dot com 2005-06-18 14:13
---
Created an attachment (id=9108)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=9108&action=view)
sample code
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22114
nathan at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
--- Additional Comments From nathan at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-18
13:04 ---
can someone send me the .i file and/or sys/ucontext.h, I don't have an x86-64
system available.
It also happens on i686-pc-linux-gnu
--- Additional Comments From graham dot stott at btinternet dot com
2005-06-18 14:21 ---
Subject: Re: Another fallout from alias warning patch
nathan at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> --- Additional Comments From nathan at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-18
> 13:04 ---
> can someon
--
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #9108|text/x-cpp |text/plain
mime type||
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22114
--
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||2.95.3 3.0.4 3.3.3 3.4.0
||4.0.0 4.1.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzi
--- Additional Comments From hp at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-18 15:35
---
Also observed for mmix-knuth-mmixware, cris-axis-elf and cris-axis-linux-gnu
appearing in the time-frame LAST_UPDATED "Tue Jun 7 09:57:32 UTC 2005" to
"Wed Jun 8 03:30:13 UTC 2005" and has failed ever since the
--- Additional Comments From dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca
2005-06-18 15:48 ---
Subject: Re: FAIL: gfortran.dg/dev_null.f90
> On linux, this code outputs 22 (EINVAL), while on freebsd it outputs 0. I
> suppose the reason of the failure is similar for other platforms.
It outpu
--- Additional Comments From hp at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-18 16:10
---
Also observed on cris-elf and cris-axis-linux-gnu, same timeframe and ever
since.
--
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Additional Comments From sgk at troutmask dot apl dot washington dot
edu 2005-06-18 16:19 ---
Subject: Re: FAIL: gfortran.dg/dev_null.f90
> int main (void)
> {
> int fd = open ("/dev/null", O_RDWR);
> ftruncate (fd, 0);
> printf ("%d\n", errno);
> close (fd);
> return 0;
--- Additional Comments From dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca
2005-06-18 16:52 ---
Subject: Re: FAIL: gfortran.dg/dev_null.f90
> The redhat system that I checked, identifies /dev/null as "a
> special file" in null(4). The ftruncate man page specifically
> states the behavior fo
--- Additional Comments From hp at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-18 17:09
---
Regarding comment #10, I can confirm that the test fails on mmix-knuth-mmixware
too (a 64-bit target), ever since it was committed; but not on cris-elf,
cris-axis-linux-gnu (32-bit targets).
--
http://gcc.gnu
--
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Summary|unrecognized insn for |[4.1 Regression]
|struct-l
--- Additional Comments From dank at kegel dot com 2005-06-18 17:46 ---
The above tests did not use -mcpu on gcc-2.95.3,
so they were comparing apples to oranges, kind of.
I reran them on a PIII with gcc-2.95.3 -mcpu=$tune -O3
and gcc-[34] -mtune=$tune -O3. The problem persists
even wh
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-18
17:57 ---
VRP is causing it:
min.14_397 = min.14_393;
max.6_398 = max.6_377;
D.554_399 = min.14_397 + max.6_398;
- if (D.554_399 != 0) goto ; else goto ;
-
-:;
D.555 = C.17;
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bu
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-18
18:02 ---
Confirmed, C testcase:
int f(int x, int y)
{
if (x != 0)
if (y != 0)
{
int t = x + y;
if (t != 0)
return 1;
}
return 0;
}
void abort ();
int main (void)
{
int
--
What|Removed |Added
Component|ada |tree-optimization
Summary|ACATS ICE cxg1004 cxg1005 |[4.1 Regression] ACATS ICE
--- Additional Comments From laurent at guerby dot net 2005-06-18 18:16
---
Still present on x86-linux as of
LAST_UPDATED: Sat Jun 18 09:02:59 UTC 2005
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18659
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-18
18:16 ---
Subject: Bug 19926
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-06-18 18:16:22
Modified files:
gcc/fortran: ChangeLog primary.c
Log message:
--- Additional Comments From kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-18 18:20
---
Fixed in 4.1. I close this when I commit to 4.0.2.
--
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-18
18:27 ---
Subject: Bug 19926
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-06-18 18:27:06
Modified files:
gcc/testsuite : ChangeLog
Added files:
gcc/t
--- Additional Comments From fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-18
18:31 ---
Reduction of this one:
type solid
integer :: i = 0
end type solid
type(solid), pointer :: a
end
so, this is indeed PR 16606. Thanks for reporting!
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate
--- Additional Comments From fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-18
18:31 ---
*** Bug 22101 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
What|Removed |Added
Hey, question.. Just wondering if gcc is supposed to behave this way now.
For example, I have a template:
template class foo
{
...
void method1(T a1) {...}
T method2() {...}
...
};
Notice, method1 accepts a parameter of type T and method2 returns a
value of type T.
Well, if foo i
--- Additional Comments From fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-18
18:42 ---
Confirmed, we should not issue such warning. Here is a (slightly) reduced
testcase:
MODULE procedures
PUBLIC :: test
PRIVATE :: test2
INTERFACE test
MODULE PROCEDURE test2
END INTERFACE
Davy Durham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hey, question.. Just wondering if gcc is supposed to behave this way
now.
> For example, I have a template: [...]
>
> In gcc-3, there was no error until you tried to call f.method2(), but in
> gcc-4 it gives the error when foo is instantiated whether the
--- Additional Comments From fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-18
18:48 ---
Well, it says: "Reported against: 3.4.2"
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21931
--- Additional Comments From lucier at math dot purdue dot edu 2005-06-18
19:37 ---
This is fixed in today's cvs sources, perhaps because of
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2005-06/msg00681.html
--
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Additional Comments From fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-18
20:17 ---
Yes it is (same backtrace and all). Well, PR15966 was GCC's most reported bug,
but this was an ex aequo. Now, it's be a not-for-share gold medal.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 15966 ***
--- Additional Comments From fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-18
20:17 ---
*** Bug 21902 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15966
With LAST_UPDATED: "Sat Jun 18 12:53:47 UTC 2005" I get:
Running /home/hp/combined/combined/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/dg.exp ...
...
FAIL: g++.dg/conversion/simd2.C (test for errors, line 15)
FAIL: g++.dg/conversion/simd2.C (test for excess errors)
With the message in the .log being:
x/combined/gcc/te
--- Additional Comments From fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-18
20:40 ---
Well, this one should be so difficult. I think the tweak should be in io.c:
/* Resolve everything in a gfc_dt structure. */
try gfc_resolve_dt (gfc_dt * dt)
There is some code called "Sanity checks on d
The following C testcase ICEs at -O2:
void g(_Complex float);
_Complex float f(int data, _Complex float x, _Complex float y)
{
_Complex float i;
_Complex float t, u, v;
if (data)
{
i = x + __imag__ y;
g(i);
}
else {
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-18
20:53 ---
This is at least ACATS test cxg1005 which fails because of this.
--
What|Removed |Added
--
What|Removed |Added
BugsThisDependsOn||22116
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22055
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-18
20:56 ---
Here is something which is slightly reduced:
void g(_Complex float);
_Complex float f(int data, _Complex float x, _Complex float y)
{
_Complex float i, t;
if (data)
{
i = x + __imag__ y;
g(i)
--- Additional Comments From fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-18
20:58 ---
How come I didn't see this one? It's a duplicate of weel-known PR 15966.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 15966 ***
--
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Additional Comments From fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-18
20:58 ---
*** Bug 20843 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
What|Removed |Added
different ICE with -fdump-tree-all (or even just -fdump-tree-pre)
The ICE for those two testcases with -fdump-tree-all is:
+===GNAT BUG
DETECTED==+
| 4.1.0 20050618 (experimental) (powerpc-apple-darwin7.8.0) GCC error: |
| in get_loop_body, at
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-18
21:10 ---
Adding RTH to the CC since it was his change which caused this.
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-18
21:22 ---
Subject: Bug 20777
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: gcc-4_0-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-06-18 21:22:09
Modified files:
gcc/fortran: Change
--- Additional Comments From fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-18
21:23 ---
Finally commited patch to 4.0. Fixed
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
--- Additional Comments From laurent at guerby dot net 2005-06-18 21:29
---
confirmed on x86_64-linux
gcc version 4.1.0 20050618 (experimental)
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/tmp$ gcc -c -O2 t.c
t.c: In function 'f':
t.c:3: internal compiler error: tree check: expected ssa_name, have v
--- Additional Comments From fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-18
21:52 ---
Since number 2 is already reported, we only have 3 and 6 left:
! test 3
REAL :: A
REAL, TARGET :: B
EQUIVALENCE(A,B)
END
! test 6
! If component of public derived type 'all_type' of type is declare
--- Additional Comments From chris at bubblescope dot net 2005-06-18 22:18
---
Actually, *slaps forehead*, the problem of empty structs can just be avoided
using EBO :) I'll knock up a patch doing just that :)
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21796
--- Additional Comments From pcarlini at suse dot de 2005-06-18 22:21
---
Ah! And in that case the solution promises to be also very clean! Remember to
post first a simple example, as usual.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21796
--- Additional Comments From dank at kegel dot com 2005-06-18 22:45 ---
I asked the fellow who posted the original problem report to give
me the results of 'cat /proc/cpuinfo' on the affected machine.
Here it is:
vendor_id : GenuineIntel
cpu family : 6
model : 8
mode
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.1.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22110
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.0.1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19216
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.0.1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21950
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.0.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19633
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.1.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21949
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |3.4.5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21351
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |3.4.2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15584
--- Additional Comments From roger at eyesopen dot com 2005-06-18 23:26
---
My apologies for not knowing this had a PR. Here's the proposed solution
that I sent to Fariborz and Dale for testing.
Index: combine.c
===
RCS fi
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-18
23:29 ---
Reopening to ...
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOP
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-18
23:29 ---
Mark as invalid.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESO
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-18
23:36 ---
Reopening to ...
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOP
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-18
23:36 ---
Mark as invalid.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESO
--
What|Removed |Added
Summary|bad code generated with |[3.0 Regression] bad code
|optimization and PIC|generated with optimization
--
What|Removed |Added
Summary|genattrtab segv |[3.1 Regression] genattrtab
||segv
Target Milestone|---
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-18
23:49 ---
Reopening to ...
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOP
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-18
23:49 ---
Mark as invalid.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESO
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-18
23:50 ---
Reopening to ...
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REO
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-18
23:50 ---
Mark as invalid.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESO
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |3.3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=5094
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |3.1.x/3.2.x
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=5141
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-18
23:58 ---
I think in the next couple of weeks I am going to work on this.
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From rmathew at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-19
01:07 ---
I think you're trying to configure and compile GCC in
the source folder. Unfortunately, this is not yet supported.
Try creating a new folder totally outside of the GCC source
tree and then run configure an
--- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-19 01:16
---
Danny, would you look at this? I have no idea why PRE is claiming to insert
an expression,
Created phi prephitmp.27_34 = PHI ; in block 2
but then not actually doing it.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/sho
--- Additional Comments From jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-19 01:34
---
Fixed 20050618 at least as regards hppa2.0w-hpux.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21916
--- Additional Comments From jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-19 01:35
---
Fixed some time between 20050615 and 20050618 (each date at 07:00 UTC).
--
What|Removed |Added
--
Bug 21953 depends on bug 21885, which changed state.
Bug 21885 Summary: [4.1 Regression] compat testsuite failures
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21885
What|Old Value |New Value
---
--- Additional Comments From jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-19 01:39
---
Also on hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.11, hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.23, hppa64-hp-hpux11.11,
hppa64-hp-hpux11.23, i686-pc-linux-gnu, ia64-hp-hpux11.23.
--
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-19
01:39 ---
Fixed, both targets.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-19
01:41 ---
Confirmed.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
E
--
What|Removed |Added
GCC host triplet|i686-pc-linux-gnu |
GCC target triplet|mmix-knuth-mmixware cris- |
|axis-elf cris-axis-linux-gnu|
Target M
--- Additional Comments From dberlin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-19
01:43 ---
Subject: Re: [4.1 Regression] PRE of
COMPLEX_EXPR causes ICE
On Sun, 2005-06-19 at 01:16 +, rth at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> --- Additional Comments From rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005
--- Additional Comments From roger at eyesopen dot com 2005-06-19 01:49
---
A revised patch, allowing equality and inequality comparisons against NULL, yet
retaining warnings for things like 'if ("foo" > 0)' and 'if ("foo" == "bar")'
was posted here: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/20
1 - 100 of 115 matches
Mail list logo
