http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48394
Nicola Pero changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23616
Nicola Pero changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||js-gcc at webkeks dot org
--- Comment #14 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38980
--- Comment #4 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-10-09 23:20:43 UTC ---
Author: paolo
Date: Sun Oct 9 23:20:39 2011
New Revision: 179731
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=179731
Log:
/cp
2011-10-09 Paolo Carlini
PR
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50683
Bug #: 50683
Summary: GCC fails to build MPFR 3.1.0 on sparc
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38980
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
AssignedTo|paolo.carlini at o
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50683
--- Comment #1 from Laurent Fousse 2011-10-09
23:26:43 UTC ---
gcc fails to build MPFR 3.1.0 on sparc. You can get a full build log from:
http://bugs.debian.org/644552
This new release of MPFR introduces TLS support. The build is successful whe
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50570
--- Comment #8 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-10-09 23:26:45 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #7)
> > > > How about this?
> > >
> > > Looks as if should work (for comment 0).
> >
> > It does. I'll check for regressions.
>
> Unfortunately it fail
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50647
Roger Meyer changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|DUPLICATE |WONTFIX
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49263
--- Comment #7 from Oleg Endo 2011-10-09 23:34:45 UTC
---
(In reply to comment #6)
> Yep, maintenance burden but I don't mean ack/nak for anything.
> If it's enough fruitful, we should take that route. When it
> gives 5% improvement in the usua
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50646
--- Comment #6 from Roger Meyer 2011-10-09
23:34:47 UTC ---
the host system is aboriginal linux 1.03
armv6l (little endian)
using gcc 4.2.1 on qemu
somehow configure seems to think that the used compiler is a crosscompiler, but
i have no idea why
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49263
--- Comment #8 from Kazumoto Kojima 2011-10-10
01:31:42 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #7)
> Option 2 seems more robust even if it seems less effective, what do you think?
Another combine pass to reduce size less than 0.3% on one target
would be n
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48665
--- Comment #4 from Ian Lance Taylor 2011-10-10 04:19:03
UTC ---
Created attachment 25451
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25451
Possible patch
It's mainly a matter of style, but this is the approach I prefer.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48665
--- Comment #5 from Marc Glisse 2011-10-10
05:55:10 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> It's mainly a matter of style, but this is the approach I prefer.
Thanks, it looks nicer indeed :-)
Would you care to commit (or submit) your patch? Or can I
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45044
--- Comment #7 from Tobias Burnus 2011-10-10
06:53:29 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> New Revision: 179729
> URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=179729
Wrong PR number. This patch was for PR 50273 ([4.5/4.6/4.7 Regression]
-
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50273
--- Comment #3 from Tobias Burnus 2011-10-10
06:54:23 UTC ---
The following patch was committed with the wrong PR number:
Author: burnus
Date: Sun Oct 9 19:37:47 2011
New Revision: 179729
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50570
--- Comment #9 from Tobias Burnus 2011-10-10
06:58:27 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> Agreed. Separate, though related. I think the error message is a bug indeed. A
> way to fix it might be:
That won't work for:
type(t), intent(in) :: dt
c
101 - 116 of 116 matches
Mail list logo
