http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48678
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48679
Summary: [4.7 regression] bootstrap comparison failures on
m68k-linux
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compon
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48603
--- Comment #7 from rguenther at suse dot de
2011-04-19 07:55:38 UTC ---
On Tue, 19 Apr 2011, jan.kratochvil at redhat dot com wrote:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48603
>
> --- Comment #6 from Jan Kratochvil
> 2011-04-19 05:0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48678
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ubizjak at gmail dot com
--- Comment #2 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48680
Summary: -Weffc++ update description for 2nd and 3rd edition of
Scott Meyers
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48603
--- Comment #8 from Jan Kratochvil
2011-04-19 08:30:52 UTC ---
It is a fully redundant information. It just makes the processing in consumers
easier. There was a first GDB patch which did not need
DW_AT{,_MIPS}_linkage_name but it had some issu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48678
--- Comment #3 from Uros Bizjak 2011-04-19 08:33:49
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> Having (strict_low_part (subreg:HI (reg:V2DI ...) 0)) on the LHS doesn't sound
> like a good idea to me (and this is created already during expansion). Maybe
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48680
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48677
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Build||i686-w64-mingw32
--- Comment #1 from Jo
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48681
Summary: static assertion using DBL_MIN/DBL_MAX/DBL_EPSILON
doesn't work with g++-4.5
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48603
--- Comment #9 from rguenther at suse dot de
2011-04-19 08:52:11 UTC ---
On Tue, 19 Apr 2011, jan.kratochvil at redhat dot com wrote:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48603
>
> --- Comment #8 from Jan Kratochvil
> 2011-04-19 08:3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46188
--- Comment #13 from Richard Guenther 2011-04-19
08:59:47 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Tue Apr 19 08:59:45 2011
New Revision: 172698
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=172698
Log:
2011-04-19 Richard Guenther
PR tree-o
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46188
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45813
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bernds at gcc dot gnu.org
Known t
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48248
--- Comment #9 from Richard Guenther 2011-04-19
09:14:08 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Tue Apr 19 09:14:05 2011
New Revision: 172701
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=172701
Log:
2011-04-18 Richard Guenther
PR preproc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48562
Alexander Monakov changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bkoz at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48669
Alexander Monakov changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48248
--- Comment #10 from Richard Guenther 2011-04-19
09:19:35 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Tue Apr 19 09:19:33 2011
New Revision: 172703
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=172703
Log:
2011-04-19 Richard Guenther
Backporte
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48678
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-04-19
09:22:37 UTC ---
Might be a good idea, though IMHO just for 4.7, not for 4.6.
Would you be ok with this patch (plus testcase obviously) for 4.6? If yes, is
it ok temporarily for 4.7 too and you'd then
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48682
Summary: Incorrect field justification with Gw.d edit
descriptor
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48679
--- Comment #1 from Andreas Schwab 2011-04-19 09:24:05
UTC ---
What are the differences?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48652
Alexander Monakov changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48652
Alexander Monakov changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bkoz at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48669
--- Comment #2 from Alexander Monakov 2011-04-19
09:26:55 UTC ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 48652 ***
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48248
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48677
--- Comment #2 from ralphengels at gmail dot com
2011-04-19 09:41:45 UTC ---
in all cases im afraid.
i tried skipping over null names but the crash persists, no output either i
just get the usual windows box with cpp.exe has stopped working.
th
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48668
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Target Milestone|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48670
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48672
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.6.1
Summary|[4.6 regressi
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48673
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Target|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48674
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.7.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48679
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.7.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48681
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Version|unknown
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48679
--- Comment #2 from Mikael Pettersson 2011-04-19
09:58:30 UTC ---
`size' shows .text size differences, diffing objdump -d outputs shows what
looks like register allocation changes. E.g. on libiberty/objalloc.o:
> size prev-libiberty/objalloc.o
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48678
--- Comment #5 from Uros Bizjak 2011-04-19 09:59:59
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> Might be a good idea, though IMHO just for 4.7, not for 4.6.
> Would you be ok with this patch (plus testcase obviously) for 4.6? If yes, is
> it ok temporari
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48588
--- Comment #6 from Mikael Morin 2011-04-19
10:27:29 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> The following seems to mostly work. I think some double resolving could happen
> - thus, one might need to tweak resolve_all_program_units.
Either this or we
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48672
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47976
--- Comment #11 from Richard Guenther 2011-04-19
10:54:50 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Tue Apr 19 10:54:47 2011
New Revision: 172706
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=172706
Log:
2011-04-19 Bernd Schmidt
PR fortran/4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47976
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[4.5/4.6/4.7 Regression]|[4.5/4.6 Regression] Recent
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48588
--- Comment #7 from Tobias Burnus 2011-04-19
11:46:58 UTC ---
Patch: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2011-04/msg00206.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48678
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|unassigned at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48661
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48683
Summary: [4.7 Regression] 252.eon in SPEC CPU 2000 failed to
build
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48207
--- Comment #6 from Richard Guenther 2011-04-19
13:05:01 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Tue Apr 19 13:04:57 2011
New Revision: 172708
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=172708
Log:
2011-04-19 Richard Guenther
PR lto/482
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48683
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone|-
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48207
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||4.7.0
--- Comment #7 from Richard Guen
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48683
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48521
--- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-04-19
13:26:15 UTC ---
Author: redi
Date: Tue Apr 19 13:26:08 2011
New Revision: 172709
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=172709
Log:
2011-04-19 Jonathan Wakely
PR libstdc++/48
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48521
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||4.7.0
Target Milestone|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48587
Francois-Xavier Coudert changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48419
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40975
Zdenek Sojka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||zsojka at seznam dot cz
--- Comment #4 fro
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47923
--- Comment #8 from Mirko 2011-04-19
14:02:18 UTC ---
Hello,
I have tried to compile the new version GCC 4.6.0
But the compilation stops anyway:
checking whether sbrk is declared... (cached) yes
checking whether strverscmp is declared... (cached
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48684
Summary: Incorrect field alignment with Gw.dEe descriptor
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: minor
Priority: P3
Component: libfortran
AssignedT
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48684
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48366
--- Comment #13 from John David Anglin 2011-04-19
14:21:24 UTC ---
Author: danglin
Date: Tue Apr 19 14:21:18 2011
New Revision: 172710
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=172710
Log:
* config/pa/pa.h (REGISTER_MOVE_COST): I
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48148
--- Comment #27 from Eric Botcazou 2011-04-19
14:46:39 UTC ---
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Tue Apr 19 14:46:37 2011
New Revision: 172712
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=172712
Log:
PR lto/48148
* gimple.c (gimple_types_
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48148
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
) ? ((void)(0)) : ((pixel) = 0)));
return 0;
}
$ gcc-snapshot-20110419/build/gcc/xgcc -Bgcc-snapshot-20110419/build/gcc/ foo.c
foo.c: In function 'main':
foo.c:3:10: internal compiler error: in gimplify_expr, at gimplify.c:7034
Please submit a full bug report,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48682
Thomas Henlich changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||thenlich at users dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48684
--- Comment #2 from Thomas Henlich
2011-04-19 14:59:36 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> Isn't this related to PR 48682 ?
Just a coincidence. BTW PR 48682 can be closed as invalid.
BTW: Above should read: The conversion in this case is F(w-n).
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48685
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48685
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|middle-end |c
--- Comment #2 from Richard Guenther
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40975
--- Comment #5 from Zdenek Sojka 2011-04-19 15:08:36
UTC ---
Indeed 3.4 works even with checking enabled:
$ /mnt/sda1/gcc-3_4/binary-172709/bin/g++ pr40975.C -c
$ g++ -v
Reading specs from
/mnt/sda1/gcc-3_4/binary-172709/bin/../lib/gcc/x86_64-un
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40975
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||3.4.6
Target Milestone|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48687
Summary: for errors from -pedantic, -Werror reports
"[-Werror=edantic]"
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
C
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44774
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||doko at ubuntu dot com
--- Comment #14
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48687
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48602
--- Comment #33 from Jerry DeLisle 2011-04-19
15:28:56 UTC ---
In response to Comment #30:
One solution seems to be to take away "static inline" for the function:
double calculate_exp(int d)
{
int i;
double r = 1.0;
for (i = 0; i< (d >= 0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48602
--- Comment #34 from Tobias Burnus 2011-04-19
16:22:16 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #33)
> We could put that behind some compiler directives looking for -m32 or similar.
Try:
temp = calculate_exp(mid - 1)* (1 - r * rexp_d);
asm volat
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46194
--- Comment #16 from Sebastian Pop 2011-04-19
16:24:44 UTC ---
The patch produces these fails on the 4.5 branch:
FAIL: gcc.dg/tree-ssa/ltrans-1.c scan-tree-dump-times ltrans "converted loop
nest to perfect loop nest" 1
FAIL: gcc.dg/tree-ssa/ltra
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48588
--- Comment #8 from Tobias Burnus 2011-04-19
16:26:21 UTC ---
Author: burnus
Date: Tue Apr 19 16:26:13 2011
New Revision: 172718
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=172718
Log:
2011-04-19 Tobias Burnus
PR fortran/48
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48462
--- Comment #10 from Tobias Burnus 2011-04-19
16:32:41 UTC ---
Note: The commit from comment 9 fixes only the issue for non-TARGET LHS.
If the LHS has the TARGET attribute (and only* then) a version with an
additional temporary has to be used to
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46752
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-04-19
16:44:02 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Apr 19 16:43:51 2011
New Revision: 172720
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=172720
Log:
PR fortran/46752
* trans-openmp.c (gfc_omp_
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48678
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-04-19
16:47:09 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Apr 19 16:47:06 2011
New Revision: 172721
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=172721
Log:
PR target/48678
* config/i386/i386.md (movs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48678
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-04-19
16:49:22 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Apr 19 16:49:19 2011
New Revision: 172723
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=172723
Log:
PR target/48678
* config/i386/i386.md (movs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48678
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48594
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[4.3/4.4/4.5/4.6/4.7] |[4.3/4.4/4.5] Rejects valid
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48688
Summary: [x64]: shift/or instead of lea
Product: gcc
Version: 4.5.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: minor
Priority: P3
Component: rtl-optimization
AssignedTo: unassig..
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48689
Summary: ICE in fold-const.c:13798
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: middle-end
AssignedTo: unassig...@gcc.gnu.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48688
--- Comment #1 from Piotr Wyderski 2011-04-19
18:00:50 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #0)
> If k is small (on x86/x64 k = 1, 2, 4, 8)
Of course it should be k = 0, 1, 2, 3, the values above are 1 << k.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48690
Summary: gcc-4.3.5 fails for target m68k
Product: gcc
Version: 4.3.5
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
AssignedTo: unassig...@gcc.gn
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48690
--- Comment #1 from diggskevin38 at gmail dot com 2011-04-19 18:49:00 UTC ---
Created attachment 24044
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24044
standalone version of popcountdi2() from libgcc2.c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48691
Summary: Assembler file clobbered with -save-temps (LTO)
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: driver
AssignedTo: u
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48691
Dmitry Gorbachev changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||lto
Severity|normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48467
Dmitry Gorbachev changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[LTO/driver] Anomalous |[LTO] Anomalous behavior of
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48690
--- Comment #2 from diggskevin38 at gmail dot com 2011-04-19 18:54:30 UTC ---
The result of -dr for fixunsxfdi() for 4.2.4 is 648 lines. Only 80 are produced
by 4.3.5. It appears to die on the left shift.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48690
--- Comment #3 from diggskevin38 at gmail dot com 2011-04-19 18:57:00 UTC ---
Created attachment 24045
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24045
partial -dr RTL dump
This is what -dr produce before it died.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48690
--- Comment #4 from diggskevin38 at gmail dot com 2011-04-19 18:59:20 UTC ---
If I understand correctly (disclosure - I might as well be trying to read
Klingon), both of these failures involve 64-bit.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48690
--- Comment #5 from diggskevin38 at gmail dot com 2011-04-19 19:24:08 UTC ---
kevdig@Satellite2775XDVD:~/projects/GCC/OBJ/gcc-4.3.5-m68k/m68k-netbsdelf1.6.1/libgcc$
gdb --args ../..//gcc/cc1 ../../../../fixunsxfdi.c -m68020 -auxbase-strip
_fixunsxf
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48690
--- Comment #6 from diggskevin38 at gmail dot com 2011-04-19 19:38:36 UTC ---
Created attachment 24046
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24046
4.3.5 build log
ya know: yadda-yadda make blah blah|tee
It has been lzma'ed.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48602
--- Comment #35 from Jerry DeLisle 2011-04-19
20:02:38 UTC ---
That does the trick. I will regression test and commit tonight
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48692
Summary: [4.7 Regression] ICE with
gfortran.dg/module_write_1.f90
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48693
Summary: [4.7 Regression] FAIL: gfortran.dg/module_write_1.f90
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
Assign
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48693
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48692
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hjl.tools at gmail dot com
--- Comment #1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48694
Summary: possible memory hog bug
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
AssignedTo: unassig...@gcc.gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48694
--- Comment #1 from John Regehr 2011-04-19 21:16:39
UTC ---
Sorry forgot to add this.
[regehr@gamow tmp011]$ current-gcc -O1 -fwhole-program small.c -w
current-gcc: internal compiler error: Killed (program cc1)
Please submit a full bug report,
w
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48695
Summary: Runtime with an array of std::vectors
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: critical
Priority: P3
Component: c++
AssignedTo: unassig...@g
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48695
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Target|
1 - 100 of 134 matches
Mail list logo
