--
bonzini at gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |bonzini at gnu dot org
|dot org |
--- Comment #10 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-30 09:26 ---
Must be darwin specific then, can't reproduce on x86_64-linux and from quick
skim of gcc-testresults nobody else that supplied test summary recently managed
to reproduced it.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_b
--- Comment #1 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2008-09-30 09:27 ---
Subject: Bug 37675
Author: bonzini
Date: Tue Sep 30 09:26:22 2008
New Revision: 140779
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=140779
Log:
2008-09-30 Paolo Bonzini <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR testsuite/
--- Comment #8 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2008-09-30 09:27 ---
Subject: Bug 36891
Author: bonzini
Date: Tue Sep 30 09:26:22 2008
New Revision: 140779
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=140779
Log:
2008-09-30 Paolo Bonzini <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR testsuite/
--- Comment #2 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2008-09-30 09:33 ---
fixed.
--
bonzini at gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #8 from ivranos at freemail dot gr 2008-09-30 09:51 ---
Note: Change the encoding of your browser and email client to Greek-ISO or
Unicode, so as to see the messages correctly.
locale -a displays the following:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/Desktop/download/extract$ locale -a
C
el_
--- Comment #6 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-30 10:03 ---
For -fwrapv I wonder why we add TREE_OVERFLOW at all.
force_fit_type_double does:
/* Size types *are* sign extended. */
sign_extended_type = (!TYPE_UNSIGNED (type)
|| (TREE_CODE (type) ==
--- Comment #13 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2008-09-30 10:21
---
*** Bug 37673 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35353
--- Comment #9 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2008-09-30 10:21
---
(In reply to comment #8)
> So this isn't a "blocker" bug, but there is still a bug with wcin.imbue() and
> wcout.imbue() when they are used alone without a
>
> "locale::global(locale("en_US"));"
>
> or
>
>
Using built-in specs.
Target: m68k-linux-uclibc
Configured with: /there/toolchain_build_m68k/gcc-4.3.2/configure --prefix=/usr
--build=i386-pc-linux-gnu --host=i386-pc-linux-gnu --target=m68k-linux-uclibc
--enable-languages=c,fortran --with-sysroot=/there/build_m68k/staging_dir
--with-build-time-to
--- Comment #1 from aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-30 10:24 ---
Created an attachment (id=16431)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=16431&action=view)
reduced from linux-2.6.26.5/fs/ocfs2/alloc.c
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37680
--- Comment #15 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-30 10:29 ---
(In reply to comment #14)
> Created an attachment (id=16429)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=16429&action=view) [edit]
> Reduced test case which is failing with the patch
>
OK - I'll get onto it!
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot
|dot org
--- Comment #21 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-30 10:37
---
Subject: Bug 37491
Author: rguenth
Date: Tue Sep 30 10:36:22 2008
New Revision: 140781
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=140781
Log:
2008-09-30 Richard Guenther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
As of 20080929 (rev 140759), libada fails to build on Solaris 10/x86:
/vol/gccsrc/obj/gcc-4.4.0-20080929/10-gcc/./gcc/xgcc
-B/vol/gccsrc/obj/gcc-4.4.0-20080929/10-gcc/./gcc/
-B/vol/gcc/i386-pc-solaris2.10/bin/ -B/vol/gcc/i386-pc-solaris2.10/lib/
-isystem /vol/gcc/i386-pc-solaris2.10/include -isyst
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-30 12:41 ---
And w/o preprocessed source we cannot do anything.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #7 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-30 12:46 ---
IMHO force_fit_type_double is correct. We also set TREE_OVERFLOW on
truncations which are implementation defined.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Adde
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.4.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37681
--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-30 13:01 ---
Fixed in 4.2.0.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|
--- Comment #3 from joel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-30 13:06 ---
Created an attachment (id=16432)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=16432&action=view)
preprocessed code
Prepropcessed output -- untrimmed
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37666
--- Comment #13 from paolo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-30 13:50 ---
Subject: Bug 30085
Author: paolo
Date: Tue Sep 30 13:49:15 2008
New Revision: 140787
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=140787
Log:
2008-09-30 Paolo Carlini <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR libst
With current trunk (rev. 140784) I get following internal error (g++ only).
The error message is similar to bug 37418.
Maybe it's the same problem, but maybe it's not.
$ /holger/gcc/gnu/trunk/install/bin/g++ -c t.c
t.c: In function unsigned int bar(unsigned int, const void*, RefId):
t.c:9: error:
--- Comment #14 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2008-09-30 13:52
---
Fixed.
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Stat
--- Comment #12 from paolo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-30 13:50 ---
Subject: Bug 30085
Author: paolo
Date: Tue Sep 30 13:48:55 2008
New Revision: 140786
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=140786
Log:
2008-09-30 Paolo Carlini <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR libst
--- Comment #4 from joel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-30 14:03 ---
Arguments to create ICE were "-O2 -mthumb"
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37666
--- Comment #24 from nickc at redhat dot com 2008-09-30 14:05 ---
Subject: Re: [cygming] Invalid alignment for SSE store
to .comm data generated with -O3
> a printf in the code for ff_cos_16 causes the compiler to align the var,
> but at this point it crashes in another place using ss
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37681
--- Comment #25 from sherpya at netfarm dot it 2008-09-30 14:10 ---
(In reply to comment #24)
> Subject: Re: [cygming] Invalid alignment for SSE store
> to .comm data generated with -O3
>
> > a printf in the code for ff_cos_16 causes the compiler to align the var,
> > but at this poin
On Linux/ia32, I got
Executing on host:
/export/gnu/import/svn/gcc-test/bld/gcc/testsuite/g++/../../g++
-B/export/gnu/import/svn/gcc-test/bld/gcc/testsuite/g++/../../
/export/gnu/import/svn/gcc-test/src-trunk/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/warn/Wparentheses-3.C
-nostdinc++
-I/export/gnu/import/svn/gcc-test
--- Comment #1 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2008-09-30 14:35 ---
Other gcc-testresults don't indicate the failure for revision 140785 or even
140781.
--
bonzini at gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2008-09-30 14:44 ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> Other gcc-testresults don't indicate the failure for revision 140785 or even
> 140781.
>
Are they run on Linux/ia32 and configured with
--enable-checking=assert --enable-clocale=gnu --wi
--- Comment #7 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-30 14:57 ---
If fixed, then it should be closed as fixed.
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-30 15:01
---
> This happens only for the 64-bit libada, so it's probably due to missing
> support for the 64-bit multilib.
Yes, it is, the hitch being that there is no port to x86_64/Solaris yet.
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot g
--- Comment #3 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2008-09-30 15:05 ---
> Linux/ia32 and --enable-checking=assert may trigger this bug.
Well, your own Linux/x86-64 builds do not have this failure, neither normally
nor for -m32. Either this bug is invalid, or it is a wrong-code somewhere
else.
--- Comment #3 from ro at techfak dot uni-bielefeld dot de 2008-09-30
15:06 ---
Subject: Re: [4.4 regression] Building 64-bit libada fails on Solaris/x86:
alignment error
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org writes:
> Yes, it is, the hitch being that there is no port to x86_64/Solaris ye
--- Comment #2 from charlet at adacore dot com 2008-09-30 15:06 ---
Subject: Re: [4.4 regression] Building 64-bit libada fails
on Solaris/x86: alignment error
> > This happens only for the 64-bit libada, so it's probably due to missing
> > support for the 64-bit multilib.
>
>
--- Comment #4 from charlet at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-30 15:06 ---
I'm assuming the proper --disable switch is either already there, if not,
probably worth opening another PR. Keeping this PR as an enhancement request
to add support for x86_64 solaris for Ada.
--
charlet at gcc
--
krebbel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37674
--- Comment #5 from laurent at guerby dot net 2008-09-30 15:15 ---
Adding Paolo as expert on configury. Rainer, let us know when you've tested
your patch (should be very close to what Eric Botcazou did for sparc-solaris).
--
laurent at guerby dot net changed:
What|Rem
--- Comment #5 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-30 15:20 ---
Subject: Bug 36592
Author: burnus
Date: Tue Sep 30 15:19:25 2008
New Revision: 140790
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=140790
Log:
2008-09-30 Janus Weil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR fortran
--- Comment #6 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-30 15:22 ---
FIXED on the trunk (4.4).
--
burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from krebbel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-30 15:30 ---
The failure can currently be seen bootstrapping ira-merge branch (rev.:
140776).
configure --enable-shared --with-system-zlib --enable-threads=posix
--enable-__cxa_atexit --enable-checking --enable-decimal-float
--e
--- Comment #6 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2008-09-30 15:38 ---
No, there is not yet an extra configure switch for that, but I'll add it. You
can create a PR and assign it to me.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37681
--- Comment #9 from ro at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-30 15:38 ---
Created an attachment (id=16433)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=16433&action=view)
minimized testcase
This minimized version of strstream.ii shows the same bug.
--
ro at gcc dot gnu dot org chang
--- Comment #6 from rrpeter at sandia dot gov 2008-09-30 15:54 ---
Subject: Re: OpenMP thinks that I have 1 processor
on an 8 processor pc
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> --- Comment #5 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-20 08:22 ---
> No, I didn't mean to ask yo
--- Comment #4 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2008-09-30 16:10 ---
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2008-08/msg01620.html
makes nested_if uninitialized for g++.dg/warn/Wparentheses-3.C:
--- gcc/cp/parser.c (revision 138452)
+++ gcc/cp/parser.c (working copy)
@@ -7120,7 +7
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-30 16:24 ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 37146 ***
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #14 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-30 16:24
---
*** Bug 37682 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #11 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-30 16:26
---
>Must be darwin specific then, can't reproduce on x86_64-linux
Has anyone tried bootstrapping on i686-linux-gnu with PIC enabled lately? This
might show the same issue.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bu
When translate_clast is called for a scop, scalar definitions are optimized out
and hence any subsequent uses of those scalars, outside the scop, represents a
problem. Also as code is generated for a scop, basic blocks in the scop are
moved around such that the block which contains the definition o
--- Comment #1 from hjagasia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-30 16:34
---
Created an attachment (id=16434)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=16434&action=view)
Reduced test case derived from CPU2006 401.bzip2 benchmark
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id
--- Comment #2 from hjagasia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-30 16:40
---
Created an attachment (id=16435)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=16435&action=view)
This patch fixes the reduced test case block-3.c
Until graphite can handle scalars and also update dominance
--- Comment #4 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-30 17:02 ---
Subject: Bug 37662
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Sep 30 17:00:49 2008
New Revision: 140792
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=140792
Log:
PR tree-optimization/37662
PR tree-optimization/3
--- Comment #2 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-30 17:02 ---
Subject: Bug 37663
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Sep 30 17:00:49 2008
New Revision: 140792
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=140792
Log:
PR tree-optimization/37662
PR tree-optimization/3
--- Comment #5 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-30 17:02 ---
Fixed.
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #3 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-30 17:03 ---
Fixed.
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #3 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-30 17:19 ---
Testing it now.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37568
The following code results in an error when optimized using -O2 or -O3 flag,
but works fine with -O1. I've also been able to "confuse" the optimizer by
adding some code just after or before the line "iX += pA2->iX;" but I'm not
sure how safe that method is.
-- Full code starts
After this patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=140660
Building bzip2 with peak flags AND -mcpu=power4 for ppc (-O3 -mcpu=power4
-ffast-math -funroll-loops -ftree-loop-linear -fpeel-loops) started ICE'ing.
Here is the backtrace:
#0 0x103a2c3c in gimple_bb (g=0x4) at
/home/lu
checking whether symbol versioning is supported... configure: error: Link tests
are not allowed after GCC_NO_EXECUTABLES.
make[2]: *** [configure-target-libgfortran] Error 1
This affects both libgfortran and libssp.
Seen with:
gcc version 4.4.0 20080930 (experimental) [trunk revision 140790] (GCC
--- Comment #3 from ro at techfak dot uni-bielefeld dot de 2008-09-30
18:09 ---
Subject: Re: [4.4 regression] All Solaris/x86 eh tests fail
I've done some further debugging: contrary to what gdb suggested, the
reason for the abort is the gcc_assert call in unwind-dw2.c
(uw_init_contex
Sent from my iPhone
On Sep 30, 2008, at 10:26 AM, "jrenggli at gmail dot com" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
The following code results in an error when optimized using -O2 or -
O3 flag,
but works fine with -O1. I've also been able to "confuse" the
optimizer by
adding some code just after or
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gmail dot com 2008-09-30 18:11 ---
Subject: Re: New: C++ over-eager optimization when working with a pointer
Sent from my iPhone
On Sep 30, 2008, at 10:26 AM, "jrenggli at gmail dot com"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> The following code results in a
--- Comment #2 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2008-09-30 18:13
---
Indeed.
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Stat
--- Comment #4 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-30 18:18
---
Yep, same on SPARC.
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-30 18:19
---
See http://sourceware.org/ml/binutils/2008-09/msg00195.html
Now someone needs to write a configure test for the compiler.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37463
--- Comment #3 from jrenggli at gmail dot com 2008-09-30 18:39 ---
Sorry about that, now that you say it it makes so much sense! I feel a bit
silly, but at least I learned something :)
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37685
This is mostly encountered for bounds of automatic arrays. The following is
invalid, but accepted by most compilers:
subroutine foo(x,n)
implicit none
real:: x(n)
integer :: n
It is also accepted by gfortran (unless -std=f2008 etc. is used). However,
currently gfortran (since 4.4 / sinc
--- Comment #1 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-30 18:49 ---
Mark as duplicate of PR 37634.
That libgfortran does not work with GCC_NO_EXECUTABLES is a known, but unfixed
problem. See PR 37634. If you have some time, you could try whether the
suggested fixes there are enough.
--- Comment #1 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-30 18:49 ---
*** Bug 37687 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #1 from domob at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-30 18:49 ---
Confirmed. I'll work this out.
--
domob at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #6 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2008-09-30 19:06 ---
Are you going to commit my tree-ssa-propagate.c patch separately, or should I
wait for 4.5?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37662
--- Comment #6 from ro at techfak dot uni-bielefeld dot de 2008-09-30
19:22 ---
Subject: Re: [4.4 regression] All Solaris/x86 eh tests fail
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org writes:
> See http://sourceware.org/ml/binutils/2008-09/msg00195.html
Thanks for the info.
> Now someone need
--- Comment #4 from simartin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-30 19:27
---
Subject: Bug 37556
Author: simartin
Date: Tue Sep 30 19:25:35 2008
New Revision: 140794
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=140794
Log:
gcc/cp/
2008-09-30 Simon Martin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Comment #3 from simartin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-30 19:27
---
Subject: Bug 37555
Author: simartin
Date: Tue Sep 30 19:25:35 2008
New Revision: 140794
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=140794
Log:
gcc/cp/
2008-09-30 Simon Martin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
/home/joel/work-gnat/svn/m32c-work/b-gcc/./gcc/xgcc
-B/home/joel/work-gnat/svn/m32c-work/b-gcc/./gcc/ -nostdinc
-B/home/joel/work-gnat/svn/m32c-work/b-gcc/m32c-elf/m32cm/newlib/ -isystem
/home/joel/work-gnat/svn/m32c-work/b-gcc/m32c-elf/m32cm/newlib/targ-include
-isystem /home/joel/work-gnat/svn/gc
--- Comment #1 from joel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-30 19:32 ---
Created an attachment (id=16436)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=16436&action=view)
preprocessed code
/home/joel/work-gnat/svn/m32c-work/b-gcc/./gcc/xgcc
-B/home/joel/work-gnat/svn/m32c-work/b-gcc/
--- Comment #7 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-30 19:41
---
> I'm a bit unsure how to test this right now: what I find is that C objects
> have read-only .eh_frame sections and use .cfi* directives, while C++, Java
> and Ada objects have read-write .eh_frame sections and s
--- Comment #4 from simartin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-30 19:57
---
Subject: Bug 37555
Author: simartin
Date: Tue Sep 30 19:56:13 2008
New Revision: 140796
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=140796
Log:
gcc/cp/
2008-09-30 Simon Martin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Comment #5 from simartin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-30 19:59
---
Fixed
--
simartin at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
--- Comment #3 from pdemarco at ppg dot com 2008-09-30 20:00 ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> maybe the same bug to 22207?
yeah, probably the same as bug 22207, but that one is only fixed on 4.0.0
We need a fix on 3.x.x
--
pdemarco at ppg dot com changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #5 from simartin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-30 20:01
---
Fixed in 4.3.3 and 4.4.0.
--
simartin at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
K
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org
--- Comment #2 from reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-30 21:33
---
The second (weakref) case has been fixed on mainline and the 4.3 branch
by the patch for PR37645. The attribute is ignored and the code compiled:
bug.c:1: warning: 'weakref' attribute ignored
The first (alias) ca
--- Comment #7 from ro at techfak dot uni-bielefeld dot de 2008-09-30
21:37 ---
Subject: Re: [4.4 regression] Building 64-bit libada fails on Solaris/x86:
alignment error
Patch here:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2008-09/msg01990.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.
--- Comment #3 from reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-30 21:44
---
With the patch for PR37649 the testcase doesn't ICE on mainline anymore.
According to Paolo's comment, this is still rejects-valid, though.
--
reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Remov
--- Comment #6 from reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-30 21:55
---
Seems as if this one got fixed on mainline with the tuples merge.
--
reichelt at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
rth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |rth at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org
--- Comment #26 from dannysmith at users dot sourceforge dot net
2008-10-01 01:33 ---
(In reply to comment #14)
> Hi Guys,
>
> I am not able to reproduce the build problems that were reported with the
> first version of my patch, but then again I do not have a native cygwin build
> s
91 matches
Mail list logo
