--- Comment #10 from roederja at cs dot washington dot edu 2007-10-09
07:00 ---
Well this doesn't fix the bug in GCC. An ICE shouldn't happen, even with
invalid code.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31979
--- Comment #3 from debian-gcc at lists dot debian dot org 2007-10-09
07:27 ---
works with 4.1 and current trunk (not allowed to change anything in this
report)
Matthias
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=445336
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=444873
--- Comment #12 from wdobler at ucalgary dot ca 2007-10-09 08:05 ---
I'll give it a try. But this may take a week or two, because my internet access
is currently limited to times when I should rather do something else...
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32147
--- Comment #3 from pluto at agmk dot net 2007-10-09 08:07 ---
still failing with 4.2.2-20070928 and 4.3.0-20071006.
--
pluto at agmk dot net changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #4 from chrbr at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 08:36 ---
*** Bug 32684 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
chrbr at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #2 from chrbr at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 08:36 ---
I think this is a duplicate of #15473 (Sibcall optimization for libcalls).
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 15473 ***
--
chrbr at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot
|
--
gnu_andrew at member dot fsf dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |0.18
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21635
--
gnu_andrew at member dot fsf dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |pre-0.18
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21649
--
gnu_andrew at member dot fsf dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |0.18
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21747
--
gnu_andrew at member dot fsf dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |0.18
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22162
System type: Linux Slackware 2.6.22.5 #1 SMP Fri Aug 24 13:40:28 CEST 2007 i686
unknown unknown GNU/Linux
gcc -m32 -c -O2 -fno-strength-reduce -fno-strict-aliasing -ansi -Wall
-Wpointer-arith -Wundef-I../../../../../programs/Xserver/hw/xfree86/common
-I../../../../../programs/Xserver/hw/xfree8
template
struct Tuple {
T* base;
void AllocateMoreSpace(unsigned size) {
base = (new T[1]) - size;
}
};
class ErrorInfo {
virtual void getErrorMessage();
};
template class Tuple;
body.3.ii: In member function 'void Tuple::AllocateMoreSpace(unsigned int)
[with T = E
--- Comment #1 from pluto at agmk dot net 2007-10-09 09:40 ---
duplicate of PR30052
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33708
Is '4.2.1' a mistake of '4.2.2' ?
http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/wwwdocs/htdocs/develop.html.diff?r1=1.81&r2=1.82
==
v v
GCC 4.3 Stage 2 GCC 4.2.1 release (Jul 18 2007)
|
--- Comment #1 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2007-10-09 10:07 ---
Fixed.
--
pcarlini at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 10:30 ---
> I don't know if there are aliasing issues, but marking it __restrict doesn't
> affect it.
It is as changing state to be uint32_t and add restrict to both arguments makes
it work correctly.
The issue here is that
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 10:32 ---
>gcc: Internal error: Killed (program cc1)
How much memory do you have?
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 10:33 ---
It is not since this is not a libcall. At the tree level, we have a __builtin
function which has been marked for tailcall.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 10:34 ---
Which is unlike the other case where we don't have a call at the tree level
that gets marked as tail called.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from aj at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 10:41 ---
Currently adding a new attachment does not work for me. I've uploaded
preprocessed sources to http://www.suse.de/~aj/cache.i.bz2
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33706
--- Comment #3 from fsemkin at yandex dot ru 2007-10-09 10:55 ---
512 MB
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33708
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 10:56 ---
This happens because we canonicalize the component ref (as we pretend an rvalue
is ok) via gimplify_addr_expr:
/* We use fb_either here because the C frontend sometimes takes
the address of a call tha
--- Comment #2 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 11:04
---
Subject: Bug 33615
Author: rsandifo
Date: Tue Oct 9 11:04:46 2007
New Revision: 129163
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=129163
Log:
gcc/
PR tree-optimization/33615
* tree-ssa
--- Comment #3 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 11:05
---
Subject: Bug 33615
Author: rsandifo
Date: Tue Oct 9 11:05:33 2007
New Revision: 129164
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=129164
Log:
gcc/
PR tree-optimization/33615
* tree-ssa
--- Comment #4 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 11:10
---
Patches applied. The consensus seemed to be that we need better
infrastructure. The suggestions were:
- set TREE_SIDE_EFFECTS for throwing expressions
- add a new predicate for checking TREE_SIDE_EFFECTS, t
--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 11:39 ---
In fact, all of canonicalize_component_ref but maybe the bit-field case should
be removed and remaining errors declared FE bugs.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33692
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 11:42 ---
Is a bootstrap & test on i386 clean otherwise (that is, if you disable
fortran)?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33679
--- Comment #49 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 11:44
---
*** Bug 33708 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 11:44 ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 30052 ***
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #8 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 12:29 ---
If you use force_gimple_operand_bsi, it takes care of that itself.
If you e.g. use force_gimple_operand instead, you need to take care of
calling mark_symbols_for_renaming yourself.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
--- Comment #33 from rakdver at kam dot mff dot cuni dot cz 2007-10-09
12:48 ---
Subject: Re: Bootstrap with vectorization enabled fails with ICE on PPC
> Zdenek, do you need an access to PPC, in order to look into this?
I was finally able to get access to the machine I left back at
--- Comment #9 from irar at il dot ibm dot com 2007-10-09 12:49 ---
(In reply to comment #8)
> If you use force_gimple_operand_bsi, it takes care of that itself.
Thanks! I will try to see if we can use it. The problem is we don't have a bsi,
we insert those stmts using bsi_insert_on_edg
--- Comment #9 from dje at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 12:50 ---
This is a long-standing issue about the way AIX loader behaves. AIX loader
implements breadth-first, not depth first. This is a difference from
SVR4-based systems. I believe that SVR4 does specify the ordeer. Look ab
--- Comment #5 from chrbr at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 13:12 ---
you are right, it's not a sibcall, my mistake.
But even at the tree level I still don't see the builtin marked as tailcall. On
a reduced case when entering find_tail_calls I have
D.1177_2 = __builtin_cos (phi_1(D));
For example:
for (i = 0; i < N; i++) {
udiff -= (ub[i] * uc[i]);
--
Summary: Missed optimization: reduction by subtraction
(vectorizer)
Product: gcc
Version: 4.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
P
--- Comment #6 from chrbr at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 13:15 ---
> you are right, it's not a sibcall, my mistake.
typo, I meant "libcall" not "sibcall"
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32684
--- Comment #1 from eres at il dot ibm dot com 2007-10-09 13:49 ---
The loop in the above example does not get vectorized because of the
subtraction in reduction; which is currently not supported.
Taken from the vectorizer dump:
test.c:19: note: worklist: examine stmt: udiff_7 = udiff_2
The threading library on the FreeBSD is named libpthread starting from
FreeBSD 5.x (the oldest supported version of the OS). Old library libc_r
from the FreeBSD 4.x times was unsupported at least starting from
FreeBSD 6.x, and is not present on FreeBSD 7.x.
gcc/ada/Makefile.in sets
THREADSLIB= -
--- Comment #3 from kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 14:12 ---
this has already been reported. See PR 33676.
Unfortunately, having a rather slow pentium4 and
incompetence with regression hunting with svn
has slowed my search down.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?
--- Comment #13 from hjl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 14:00 ---
Subject: Bug 33669
Author: hjl
Date: Tue Oct 9 14:00:11 2007
New Revision: 129166
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=129166
Log:
gcc/
2007-10-09 Kenneth Zadeck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR mid
--- Comment #2 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 14:00
---
(In reply to comment #1)
> Is a bootstrap & test on i386 clean otherwise (that is, if you disable
> fortran)?
Yes it does. Well, apart from the mayalias failures.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?
--- Comment #2 from aj at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 14:08 ---
Created an attachment (id=14330)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14330&action=view)
Preprocessed and compressed source file
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33706
--- Comment #4 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 14:24
---
*** Bug 33679 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #4 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 14:24
---
(In reply to comment #3)
> this has already been reported. See PR 33676.
Great! I'm glad I'm not mad and other people are seeing it as well.
> Unfortunately, having a rather slow pentium4 and
> incompetence wit
--- Comment #1 from charlet at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 14:36 ---
This is indeed fixed already on trunk as suggested.
Arno
--
charlet at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #10 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 14:45 ---
Please see http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-09/msg00155.html
(the second patch in it). While the first patch has been committed, if
there are other testcases which show that the lack of mark_symbols_for_renamin
--- Comment #10 from bangerth at dealii dot org 2007-10-09 14:53 ---
If it's a request to improve the AIX linker, should we even keep this PR
open?
David, as a sidenote (because you're at IBM), this is the sort of thing that
makes AIX such an unpopular target to do development on. It ju
--- Comment #6 from hubicka at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 14:54 ---
It is little bit sick, but what about implying -mfpmath=sse when
-ftree-vectorize is used and SSE is available?
The reason why we don't default to fpmath=sse is because the extra precision is
told to be part of i386
--- Comment #6 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 14:58 ---
Works for me with r129166. I suppose this was x86_64. And a dup of either
PR33600 or PR33552.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
libtheora has
typedef int int16_t __attribute__ ((__mode__ (__HI__)));
typedef int16_t ogg_int16_t;
void oc_frag_recon_inter2_mmx(unsigned char *_dst,int _dst_ystride,
const unsigned char *_src1,int _src1_ystride,const unsigned char *_src2,
int _src2_ystride,const ogg_int16_t *_residue)
{
long
--- Comment #11 from dje at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 15:07 ---
The problem *could* be solved in GCC, so it probably is worth retaining the PR.
AIX Brand is much more likely to respond to a customer requirement than a
request from within IBM. When the problem affects a sale, IBM w
--- Comment #2 from kostikbel at ukr dot net 2007-10-09 15:16 ---
Could it be merged into 4.2 branch ?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33712
--- Comment #12 from bangerth at dealii dot org 2007-10-09 15:18 ---
(In reply to comment #11)
> The problem *could* be solved in GCC, so it probably is worth retaining the
> PR.
OK.
> AIX Brand is much more likely to respond to a customer requirement than a
> request from within IBM
--- Comment #14 from zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2007-10-09 15:32
---
Subject: Re: [4.3 Regression] Revision 128957
miscompiles 481.wrf
hjl at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> --- Comment #13 from hjl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 14:00 ---
> Subject: Bug 33669
>
> Auth
--- Comment #15 from zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2007-10-09 15:41
---
Subject: Re: [4.3 Regression] Revision 128957
miscompiles 481.wrf
This patch fixes the problem in a slightly different way. The other
patch was too conservative in that it ended up setting the added flag
too
--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 15:51 ---
Subject: Bug 33692
Author: rguenth
Date: Tue Oct 9 15:51:46 2007
New Revision: 129167
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=129167
Log:
2007-10-09 Richard Guenther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR
This was noticed by building a cross compiler from i386 to x86_64. gcc 4.2.1
will miscompile insn-output.c, the prologue_save_insn emitter. Can be
extracted to the attached runtime testcase. The loop exit condition is
miscompiled by ivopts with simply -O2. Before ivopts we have:
i_28 = i_48
--- Comment #1 from matz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 15:52 ---
Created an attachment (id=14331)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14331&action=view)
runtime testcase
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33714
I would like to have a warning in C++ that warns about local variables assigned
via operator new or operator new[], but then are not freed in an exception
handling clause in case of an exception.
This would probably be very noisy, but would also be very helpful in getting
your own code exception s
--- Comment #5 from giovannibajo at libero dot it 2007-10-09 16:14 ---
After each merge command, use "svn info" to identify the unique revision number
to which those dates correspond. You can then use the same "svn merge" with
revision number to further reghunt this bug.
--
giovannib
--- Comment #6 from giovannibajo at libero dot it 2007-10-09 16:15 ---
Scratch that, sorry, "svn info" wouldn't convey the correct info. You need to
use svn log to roughly convert between dates and revnums.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33676
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 16:16 ---
Confirmed. You need HWI of 32bits to trigger the problem. Maybe latent on
the trunk (I didn't check if it fails there, too).
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #16 from hjl at lucon dot org 2007-10-09 16:19 ---
(In reply to comment #14)
> Subject: Re: [4.3 Regression] Revision 128957
> miscompiles 481.wrf
>
>
> please back this out. i have a different patch that i have finished
> testing. this one is too conservative.
>
I bac
Consider this function:
unsigned long long x(unsigned long long l) {
return l >> 4;
}
gcc will use the shrd instruction here, which is much slower than doing it "by
hand" on at least Athlon, Pentium 3, VIA C3. On Core 2 shrd appears to be
faster.
On my Athlon 64, I measured 350 cycles vs 441
--
rakdver at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |rakdver at gcc dot gnu dot
|dot org
--- Comment #1 from matz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 16:50 ---
In 4.2.x CSE1 will already fold back the force-addr insns into the users,
i.e. the asm insn will not even see different registers in those 'm' operands
as address but simply (argp + ). trunk somehow manages to _not_
pr
--- Comment #7 from hjl at lucon dot org 2007-10-09 17:05 ---
It may be related to PR 33669.
--
hjl at lucon dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
gcc generates very poor code on some bignum code I wrote.
I put the sample code to http://dl.fefe.de/bignum-add.c for you to look at.
The crucial loop is this (x, y and z are arrays of unsigned int).
for (i=0; i<100; ++i) {
l += (unsigned long long)x[i] + y[i];
z[i]=l;
l>>=32;
}
--- Comment #2 from matz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 17:41 ---
I think this happens because gcc 4.3.x doesn't have fold_rtx_mem() and friends
anymore since the introduction of fwprop.c. It formerly used to also lookup
the address of the given MEMs, and hence perform this substitut
--- Comment #7 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 17:59 ---
I get:
sincostmp.5 = __builtin_cexpi (phi);
REALPART_EXPR <> = REALPART_EXPR ;
IMAGPART_EXPR <> = IMAGPART_EXPR ;
return ;
Which is created after the sincos pass as:
sincostmp.5_7 = __builtin_cexpi (phi_1(
--- Comment #7 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 18:05 ---
Yes Wolfgang, please close this.
I'm testing the fix for the rest of the default constructible issues.
-benjaminh
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33487
--- Comment #7 from gnu_andrew at member dot fsf dot org 2007-10-09 18:40
---
Current Classpath has:
FileBasedFactory.java GConfBasedFactory.java MemoryBasedFactory.java
so 3 times the number of factories as when this bug was written. Can we close
it or are we still not co
--- Comment #3 from gnu_andrew at member dot fsf dot org 2007-10-09 18:42
---
Is this still a valid thing to do? We have an associated JikesRVM task for it:
http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/RVM-266
--
gnu_andrew at member dot fsf dot org changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #8 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 18:43 ---
We still don't interoperate properly.
Now that OpenJDK exists someone could implement this, if we still care.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19613
--- Comment #8 from belyshev at depni dot sinp dot msu dot ru 2007-10-09
18:43 ---
// Small testcase, compile with "-march=i586 -O0 -fomit-frame-pointer":
__attribute__((noreturn,noinline)) void abrt (const char *fi, const char *fu)
{
__builtin_abort ();
}
__attribute__((noinline))
--- Comment #9 from hjl at lucon dot org 2007-10-09 18:47 ---
Revision 128957 causes this regression.
--
hjl at lucon dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #8 from bangerth at dealii dot org 2007-10-09 18:48 ---
Fixed, thanks y'all!
--
bangerth at dealii dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASS
--- Comment #36 from hubicka at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 18:57
---
Startup times was optimized a bit in 4.3.
hashes.c, 100 compilations:
GCC-3.3 GCC-3.4 mainline mainline&profiledbootstrap
-O0 3.2s3.8s 3.6s3.3s
-O1 5s
--- Comment #4 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 19:20
---
Change target milestone to 4.2.3, as 4.2.2 has been released.
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #14 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 19:20
---
Change target milestone to 4.2.3, as 4.2.2 has been released.
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #15 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 19:20
---
Change target milestone to 4.2.3, as 4.2.2 has been released.
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #30 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 19:20
---
Change target milestone to 4.2.3, as 4.2.2 has been released.
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #10 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 19:20
---
Change target milestone to 4.2.3, as 4.2.2 has been released.
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #28 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 19:20
---
Change target milestone to 4.2.3, as 4.2.2 has been released.
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #11 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 19:20
---
Change target milestone to 4.2.3, as 4.2.2 has been released.
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #10 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 19:20
---
Change target milestone to 4.2.3, as 4.2.2 has been released.
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #12 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 19:20
---
Change target milestone to 4.2.3, as 4.2.2 has been released.
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #31 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 19:20
---
Change target milestone to 4.2.3, as 4.2.2 has been released.
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #7 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 19:20
---
Change target milestone to 4.2.3, as 4.2.2 has been released.
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 19:20
---
Change target milestone to 4.2.3, as 4.2.2 has been released.
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 19:20
---
Change target milestone to 4.2.3, as 4.2.2 has been released.
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #8 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 19:20
---
Change target milestone to 4.2.3, as 4.2.2 has been released.
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 19:20
---
Change target milestone to 4.2.3, as 4.2.2 has been released.
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #6 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 19:20
---
Change target milestone to 4.2.3, as 4.2.2 has been released.
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #31 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 19:20
---
Change target milestone to 4.2.3, as 4.2.2 has been released.
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #21 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 19:20
---
Change target milestone to 4.2.3, as 4.2.2 has been released.
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #3 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 19:20
---
Change target milestone to 4.2.3, as 4.2.2 has been released.
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #24 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 19:20
---
Change target milestone to 4.2.3, as 4.2.2 has been released.
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #17 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 19:20
---
Change target milestone to 4.2.3, as 4.2.2 has been released.
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
1 - 100 of 205 matches
Mail list logo
