--- Comment #9 from thomas dot g dot girard at free dot fr 2006-07-24
07:23 ---
For what it's worth:
* I have been able to reproduce this problem on a cross compiler
* the same code compiles without problem if inheritance is not virtual
--
thomas dot g dot girard at free dot fr ch
--- Comment #5 from sayle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-07-24 07:29 ---
Subject: Bug 28247
Author: sayle
Date: Mon Jul 24 07:29:46 2006
New Revision: 115707
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=115707
Log:
PR target/28247
* gthr-solaris.h: Prototype __gt
--- Comment #6 from anlauf at gmx dot de 2006-07-24 08:06 ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> No, it is still the same bug in glibc even though it is a different target and
> 32bit vs 64bit.
>
> *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 28351 ***
Andy, please show me a testcase that fa
--- Comment #7 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-07-24 08:09 ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> Andy, please show me a testcase that fails on 32bit.
Any old TLS testcase will do. Also I am not Andy but Andrew.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28456
--- Comment #8 from anlauf at gmx dot de 2006-07-24 08:13 ---
(In reply to comment #7)
> (In reply to comment #6)
> > Andy, please show me a testcase that fails on 32bit.
>
> Any old TLS testcase will do. Also I am not Andy but Andrew.
So could you please point me to one?
--
http
--- Comment #9 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-07-24 08:19 ---
Fixed.
--- Comment #10 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-07-24 08:19
---
Subject: Bug 28029
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Jul 24 08:18:51 2006
New Revision: 115708
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?roo
--- Comment #9 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-07-24 08:19 ---
Fixed.
--- Comment #10 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-07-24 08:19
---
Subject: Bug 28029
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Jul 24 08:18:51 2006
New Revision: 115708
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?roo
--- Comment #7 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-07-24 08:26 ---
Subject: Bug 27795
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Jul 24 08:25:57 2006
New Revision: 115709
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=115709
Log:
2006-07-21 Richard Guenther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR
--- Comment #12 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-07-24 08:26
---
Subject: Bug 26719
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Jul 24 08:25:57 2006
New Revision: 115709
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=115709
Log:
2006-07-21 Richard Guenther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Comment #30 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-07-24 08:26
---
Subject: Bug 27639
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Jul 24 08:25:57 2006
New Revision: 115709
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=115709
Log:
2006-07-21 Richard Guenther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Comment #8 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-07-24 08:28 ---
Fixed.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
--- Comment #31 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-07-24 08:29
---
Fixed.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
--- Comment #13 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-07-24 08:29
---
Fixed.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
--- Comment #11 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-07-24 08:33
---
Is this now fixed on the mainline?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27937
--
aph at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |aph at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org
--- Comment #11 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-07-24 10:28
---
Subject: Bug 28238
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Jul 24 10:27:53 2006
New Revision: 115711
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=115711
Log:
2006-07-24 Richard Guenther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Comment #12 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-07-24 10:28
---
Fixed.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNE
--- Comment #13 from raif at swiftdsl dot com dot au 2006-07-24 10:58
---
i'm marking this FIXED as per Casey's patch.
i've also added a Mauve testlet to validate the current codebase: TestOfPR27228
in gnu.testlet.gnu.javax.crypto.jce.
--
raif at swiftdsl dot com dot au changed:
--- Comment #19 from hubicka at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-07-24 11:24
---
Subject: Bug 28071
Author: hubicka
Date: Mon Jul 24 11:23:21 2006
New Revision: 115712
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=115712
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/28071
* ipa-inline.c (u
--- Comment #20 from hubicka at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-07-24 11:28
---
Subject: Bug 28071
Author: hubicka
Date: Mon Jul 24 11:27:53 2006
New Revision: 115713
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=115713
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/28071
* tree-cfg.c (tre
because then we hit
make[1]: Entering directory `/abuild/rguenther/obj-115527:115528/gcc'
../../gcc-4_1-branch/gcc/fortran/Make-lang.in:134: *** target pattern contains
no `%'. Stop.
that line looks like
html:: $(htmldir)/gfortran/index.html
and we have
objdir = /abuild/rguenther/obj-115527:
--- Comment #5 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-07-24 11:39 ---
Works for me.
$ ~/gcc/gcj-eclipse/obj-x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/gcc/jc1
/tmp/LightweightRedirector.class -fhash-synchronization
-fno-use-divide-subroutine -fuse-boehm-gc -fnon-call-exceptions
-fkeep-inline-functions -qu
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-07-24 11:43 ---
Subject: Bug 28463
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Jul 24 11:42:52 2006
New Revision: 115714
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=115714
Log:
2006-07-24 Richard Guenther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR
--- Comment #21 from hubicka at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-07-24 11:54
---
OK, some summary ;)
Mainline (after the first three patches) at -O now peaks 450MB (just because of
register allocator's conflict matrix, otherwise it is about 150MB). Still not
quite icc's 12 seconds/200MB, but
Hi,
I am working on a SH port with Gcc-3.4.5, and I am getting Internal Compiler
Error( Segmentation Fault).
I have inlcuded a CPP test case that helps to reproduce this bug on
Fedora Core 2 when compiled with optimization option "-O2".
I have debugged the Gcc code for this particular test
--- Comment #1 from prafullat at kpitcummins dot com 2006-07-24 12:54
---
Created an attachment (id=11927)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=11927&action=view)
test case
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28467
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|critical|normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28467
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-07-24 13:35 ---
I don't think there is anything GCC can do about this.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-07-24 13:36 ---
It could detect it early during configure maybe. Other than that I agree.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28466
--- Comment #2 from patchapp at dberlin dot org 2006-07-24 14:15 ---
Subject: Bug number PR c++/27572
A patch for this bug has been added to the patch tracker.
The mailing list url for the patch is
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2006-07/msg01036.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzil
Versions:
* gcc: gcc (GCC) 4.2.0 20060715 (experimental)
* cpu: AMD-K7 (i686)
* kernel: Linux 2.4.21-99 (SuSE 9.0)
* glibc: glibc-2.3.6 built with LinuxThreads, _not_ NPTL
Test program:
== omp-test1.c ===
#include
#include
/* A computational task
--- Comment #13 from edmar at freescale dot com 2006-07-24 15:05 ---
For my part (e500v2) it works just fine. I have being using since april for my
regression tests. As Andrew posted, the question is the impact on other
targets...
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27075
--- Comment #3 from hbgku6602 at sneakemail dot com 2006-07-24 15:30
---
(In reply to comment #1)
> All gcc versions I have take the template in namespace odd, and so does
> icc in strict mode. I see nothing in 3.4.2 that should prevent this
> from happening. What is relevant here is
--- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-07-24 15:33 ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> It would have been so say in case of int.
There is a defect report about the case of int anyways.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21615
--- Comment #4 from hjl at lucon dot org 2006-07-24 15:42 ---
Is my patch in 4.1?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28437
--- Comment #10 from kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-07-24 16:54 ---
Subject: Bug 28439
Author: kargl
Date: Mon Jul 24 16:54:01 2006
New Revision: 115718
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=115718
Log:
2006-07-24 Steven G. Kargl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR for
--- Comment #4 from vz-gcc at zeitlins dot org 2006-07-24 17:02 ---
I'd like to (probably uselessly but still) argue for reopening this bug and
removing this warning. The interpretation of the standard text is open to
questions: IMHO an "A *" pointer is a pointer to void, too, as any poi
--- Comment #1 from pluto at agmk dot net 2006-07-24 17:16 ---
oops, duplicated, sorry.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 26542 ***
--
pluto at agmk dot net changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #5 from pluto at agmk dot net 2006-07-24 17:16 ---
*** Bug 28459 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26542
When executing `make bootstrap', the following error occurs.
stage1/xgcc -Bstage1/ -B/usr/local/i686-pc-linux-gnu/bin/ -O2 -g
-fomit-frame-pointer -DIN_GCC -W -Wall -Wwrite-strings -Wstrict-prototypes
-Wmissing-prototypes -pedantic -Wno-long-long -Wno-variadic-macros
-Wold-style-definition
Observing it at least on stage 1 compiler, and exactly the same way as
in 3.3.2.
If inline function, later called a functional, is passed a function
argument that is constant and inline, and said argument is called in
the functional body, and when inline expansions are on, compiler
expand inline
gcc command line:
-
gcc -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I. -I.. -I.. -I./zziplib -I./mspack -g -O2 -MT pe.lo
-MD -MP -MF .deps/pe.Tpo -c pe.c -fPIC -DPIC -o .libs/pe.lo
error:
--
pe.c: In function `cli_scanpe':
pe.c:1552: internal error: Segmentation fault
Please submit a full bug report
--- Comment #1 from ivan at lasertech dot com dot br 2006-07-24 17:49
---
Created an attachment (id=11928)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=11928&action=view)
the preprocessed file
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28471
Some targets in `gcc/Makefile.in' built while `make bootstrap' specify
`-B$(build_tooldir)/bin/'. All of this is done when nothing from gcc
being built is installed in that directory yet. What is installed
there, if any, generally has nothing to do with gcc at all. It may
easily be files from o
>
>
>
> When executing `make bootstrap', the following error occurs.
>
> stage1/xgcc -Bstage1/ -B/usr/local/i686-pc-linux-gnu/bin/ -O2 -g
> -fomit-frame-pointer -DIN_GCC -W -Wall -Wwrite-strings -Wstrict-prototypes
> -Wmissing-prototypes -pedantic -Wno-long-long -Wno-variadic-macros
> -Wold
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu 2006-07-24 18:07
---
Subject: Re: New: stage2 error: toplev.c redefines floor_log2
>
>
>
> When executing `make bootstrap', the following error occurs.
>
> stage1/xgcc -Bstage1/ -B/usr/local/i686-pc-linux-gnu/bin/ -O2 -g
> -
--- Comment #2 from ivan at lasertech dot com dot br 2006-07-24 19:08
---
Sorry, my error
--
ivan at lasertech dot com dot br changed:
What|Removed |Added
Seve
--- Comment #2 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-07-24 19:29
---
> All statically linked OpenMP Fortran programs cause segment fault when
> executed
> on i686-pc-linux-gnu platform.
To help making further progress on this PR, could you report the different
glibc version numbe
--
fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|critical|normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28443
--- Comment #14 from raj dot khem at gmail dot com 2006-07-24 19:34 ---
FWIW. I also have it working using current 4.1 branch snapshot and the patch in
comment #8.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27075
--- Comment #9 from wilson at tuliptree dot org 2006-07-24 19:34 ---
Subject: Re: [4.0/4.1/4.2 regression] in schedule_insns,
at sched-rgn.c:3038 on mips
On Sat, 2006-07-22 at 14:14, echristo at apple dot com wrote:
> --- Comment #7 from echristo at apple dot com 2006-07-2
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-07-24 19:41 ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 9079 ***
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #14 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-07-24 19:41
---
*** Bug 28470 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-07-24 19:42 ---
This is a bug in the kernel headers which have been fixed in a newer kernel.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-07-24 19:46 ---
This is a bug in glibc with TLS and static linking. It has been fixed already
in newer glibcs.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #18 from patchapp at dberlin dot org 2006-07-24 19:50 ---
Subject: Bug number PR26197
A patch for this bug has been added to the patch tracker.
The mailing list url for the patch is
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2006-07/msg01043.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/s
--- Comment #3 from gin at mo dot msk dot ru 2006-07-24 19:52 ---
Subject: Re: stage2 error: toplev.c redefines floor_log2
On other system where that translation module compiles normally there
are also 2 definitions of the same function, but even function type
declarations in definitio
--- Comment #5 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-07-24 20:12 ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> Don't you need a HAVE_GFC_REAL_16 section or is random_r10 used
> for random_r16?
Oops, I uploaded the wrong patch. Sorry 'bout that.
However, I still need to think a bit about what con
--- Comment #5 from eedelman at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-07-24 20:16
---
Subject: Bug 28416
Author: eedelman
Date: Mon Jul 24 20:15:59 2006
New Revision: 115721
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=115721
Log:
fortran/
2006-07-24 Erik Edelmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Comment #6 from gnu_andrew at member dot fsf dot org 2006-07-24 20:16
---
Does your compiled version of java.lang.Class contain a field class$0? This is
what me and Tom narrowed the problem down to.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28458
--- Comment #6 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-07-24 20:23 ---
Created an attachment (id=11929)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=11929&action=view)
current status of patch
This is the current status of the patch. As I wrote,
this isn't yet complete.
Thomas
--- Comment #5 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-07-24 20:52 ---
Works with "GCC: (GNU) 4.1.1 20060518 (prerelease)".
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28437
When compiling with -O or greater optimization, and if x > INT_MAX, then code
like this:
uint64_t y = (uint64_t)round(x);
assigns the wrong value to y (the top 32 bits are all 1s). But this code
assigns the right value to z:
double dz = round(x);
uint64_t z = dz;
It almost seems as
--- Comment #1 from maxp at alum dot mit dot edu 2006-07-24 20:54 ---
Created an attachment (id=11930)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=11930&action=view)
preprocessor output
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28473
--- Comment #5 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-07-24 21:02
---
Subject: Bug 20892
Author: fxcoudert
Date: Mon Jul 24 21:02:39 2006
New Revision: 115722
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=115722
Log:
PR fortran/28129
* trans-array.c (gfc_tr
--- Comment #4 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-07-24 21:02
---
Subject: Bug 28129
Author: fxcoudert
Date: Mon Jul 24 21:02:39 2006
New Revision: 115722
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=115722
Log:
PR fortran/28129
* trans-array.c (gfc_tr
--- Comment #4 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-07-24 21:02
---
Subject: Bug 27874
Author: fxcoudert
Date: Mon Jul 24 21:02:39 2006
New Revision: 115722
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=115722
Log:
PR fortran/28129
* trans-array.c (gfc_tr
--- Comment #6 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-07-24 21:03
---
Fixed.
--
fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSI
--- Comment #5 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-07-24 21:04
---
Fixed.
--
fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSI
--- Comment #5 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-07-24 21:04
---
Fixed.
--
fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSI
There is a bug in mangle_name.c which leads to mangling any name containing two
underscores followed by a capital "U", even if those three characters are not
consecutive. For example, the following program will not link:
[begin Test.java]
public class Test {
public static final native void x_y_
--- Comment #1 from gcc-bugzilla at seibutsu dot mailsnare dot net
2006-07-24 21:07 ---
Created an attachment (id=11931)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=11931&action=view)
patch to reset uuU variable when a non-underscore is encountered
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bug
--- Comment #5 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-07-24 21:30
---
This one is still here, segfaulting or giving incorrect error message depending
on the optimization level used for building the front-end.
We enter write_symbol1 with p->u.rsym->sym.name = "sub_module", we go to
--- Comment #6 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-07-24 21:46 ---
Also works with "GCC: (GNU) 4.1.2 20060724 (prerelease)", but fails with "GCC:
(GNU) 4.2.0 20060723 (experimental)".
So my guess is: HJ, no your patch is not in the FSF GCC 4.1 but it is in the
--- Comment #7 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-07-24 21:47 ---
Not an FSF GCC 4.1 bug.
--
steven at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to
--- Comment #4 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-07-24 21:47
---
I think this one is now fixed, at least on mainline.
--
fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #8 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-07-24 21:51 ---
HJ definitely caused this bug:
Starting program: /home/steven/devel/build-trunk-test/gcc/xgcc -B.
-fno-builtin-iswalpha -fno-builtin-iswalnum -S b.c
Breakpoint 2, main (argc=6, argv=0x7fc7bbb8) at gcc.c:6096
609
>
> When compiling with -O or greater optimization, and if x > INT_MAX, then code
> like this:
> uint64_t y = (uint64_t)round(x);
> assigns the wrong value to y (the top 32 bits are all 1s). But this code
> assigns the right value to z:
> double dz = round(x);
> uint64_t z = dz;
>
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu 2006-07-24 22:01
---
Subject: Re: New: with -O, casting result of round(x) to uint64_t produces
wrong values for x > INT_MAX
>
> When compiling with -O or greater optimization, and if x > INT_MAX, then code
> like this:
> ui
--- Comment #9 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-07-24 22:13 ---
Created an attachment (id=11932)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=11932&action=view)
Don't prune options that can be "Joined"
Seems to me like pruning Joined options is always wrong.
But, HJ, sinc
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.1.2 |4.2.0
Version|4.1.2 |4.2.0
http://
--- Comment #3 from fjahanian at apple dot com 2006-07-24 23:16 ---
gcc generates two separate trees for compound literals in c and c++. As in this
test case:
struct S {
int i,j;
};
void foo (struct S);
int main ()
{
foo((struct S){1,1});
}
In c it generates compound_
--- Comment #10 from hjl at lucon dot org 2006-07-25 00:36 ---
A patch is posted at
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2006-07/msg01048.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28437
--- Comment #3 from reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-07-25 00:57
---
Subject: Bug 27572
Author: reichelt
Date: Tue Jul 25 00:57:10 2006
New Revision: 115729
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=115729
Log:
PR c++/27572
* decl.c (grokdeclarator): Re
--- Comment #4 from reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-07-25 01:02
---
Subject: Bug 27572
Author: reichelt
Date: Tue Jul 25 01:02:08 2006
New Revision: 115730
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=115730
Log:
PR c++/27572
* decl.c (grokdeclarator): Re
--- Comment #5 from reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-07-25 01:06
---
Subject: Bug 27572
Author: reichelt
Date: Tue Jul 25 01:06:15 2006
New Revision: 115731
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=115731
Log:
PR c++/27572
* decl.c (grokdeclarator): Re
--- Comment #6 from reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-07-25 01:55
---
Fixed on mainline, 4.1 branch, and 4.0 branch.
Some of the testcases still crash, but they crash in
get_innermost_template_args.
This problem is tracked in PR 27397.
--
reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-07-25 02:12 ---
Hmm, this works correctly on powerpc-darwin, where we get no round function at
all.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28473
g++ asked me to submit a report:
g++: Internal error: Segmentation fault (program cc1plus)
Please submit a full bug report.
See http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.html> for instructions.
I was able to trim the code down to:
// bug_20060724.cc
// ===
template < typename T >
class pointer;
temp
--- Comment #2 from patchapp at dberlin dot org 2006-07-25 05:10 ---
Subject: Bug number PR28335
A patch for this bug has been added to the patch tracker.
The mailing list url for the patch is
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2006-07/msg01054.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/sh
90 matches
Mail list logo
