http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53083
--- Comment #7 from Da Fox 2012-05-01
07:54:54 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #6)
...
> The latest available gcc-version for my distribution (gentoo) appears to be
> 4.6.2, which I will try next.
This seems to still happen with 4.6.2 at least.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27139
--- Comment #4 from Marc Glisse 2012-05-01
09:32:25 UTC ---
Hello Uros,
is there any other case you think should be handled, or should we close the
bug?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53173
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53112
--- Comment #13 from birender.singh at hotmail dot com 2012-05-01 09:40:31 UTC
---
The error removed when configured with --enable-languages=c,c++ only.
Is this correct? or if this gcc is build then does it make effect to java ?
beacuse don't kn
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53173
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely 2012-05-01
09:40:53 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #0)
> 4. error: no matching function for call to ‘make_pair(std::string&,
> std::string&)’
If you're calling make_pair with an explicit template argument list e
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53173
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely 2012-05-01
09:41:34 UTC ---
Also, please give more useful bug descriptions, "PROD02" is completely
meaningless
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51267
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53112
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52538
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53100
--- Comment #3 from Marc Glisse 2012-05-01
12:47:03 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> and not to introduce them just before an optimization that removes them.
Usually, doing (long)num1*(__int128)(long)num2 does the right thing. I tried in
the e
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44664
Mark Wielaard changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53101
--- Comment #2 from Marc Glisse 2012-05-01
15:10:26 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> We get MEM[(T * {ref-all})&x] for the casting (not a BIT_FIELD_REF for
> example).
> This gets expanded to
>
> (insn 6 5 7 (set (reg:OI 63)
> (subreg:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53133
--- Comment #4 from H.J. Lu 2012-05-01 16:42:32
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> However, Core architecture is not listed under X86_TUNE_PARTIAL_REG_STALL,
> although my documentation says that following latency should be added due to
> partial
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53101
--- Comment #3 from Marc Glisse 2012-05-01
17:17:42 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> but operands[2] and operands[3] don't compare equal with rtx_equal_p, and
> trying a match_dup refuses to compile because of the mode mismatch, so I don't
> kn
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53175
Bug #: 53175
Summary: Fortran 4.8 undefined reference to a variable in a
module
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53176
Bug #: 53176
Summary: [4.8 Regression] gcc.target/i386/movbe-2.c and
gcc.dg/lower-subreg-1.c
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIR
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53176
Kenneth Zadeck changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||zadeck at naturalbridge dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53115
--- Comment #5 from François Dumont 2012-05-01
19:38:35 UTC ---
Author: fdumont
Date: Tue May 1 19:38:28 2012
New Revision: 187023
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=187023
Log:
2012-05-01 François Dumont
PR libstdc++
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53177
Bug #: 53177
Summary: 20_util/function/cons/callable.cc failed with -m32
-march=corei7
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53178
Bug #: 53178
Summary: fixinclude needed for iso/ctype_iso.h on Solaris 8
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37303
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ian at airs dot com
Known to fail
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53179
Bug #: 53179
Summary: fixinclude needed for pthread.h on AIX 5.3
(PTHREAD_ONCE_INIT)
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53179
--- Comment #1 from Daniel Richard G. 2012-05-01
20:17:24 UTC ---
Created attachment 27275
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=27275
Fixed version of pthread.h
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53180
Bug #: 53180
Summary: Revision 186378 generates incorrect code for cpu2006
416.gamess
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53115
--- Comment #6 from François Dumont 2012-05-01
20:29:24 UTC ---
Author: fdumont
Date: Tue May 1 20:29:16 2012
New Revision: 187025
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=187025
Log:
2012-05-01 François Dumont
PR libstdc++
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37743
Jeffrey Yasskin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jyasskin at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37743
--- Comment #8 from Jeffrey Yasskin 2012-05-01
20:47:00 UTC ---
Arguably, the bad diagnostic (reporting "unsigned int!=unsigned int") is more
serious than the bswap bug, since it may show up for other functions.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53177
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53177
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely 2012-05-01
21:06:37 UTC ---
Created attachment 27277
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=27277
testcase
I was seeing an ICE in the same place with an earlier version of the changes
which caused
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53177
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
AssignedTo|redi at gcc dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49484
--- Comment #24 from asharif at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-05-01 21:22:51 UTC ---
Author: asharif
Date: Tue May 1 21:22:47 2012
New Revision: 187026
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=187026
Log:
Backported r185231 from trunk.
2012-
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37303
--- Comment #5 from ian at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-05-01
21:25:20 UTC ---
Author: ian
Date: Tue May 1 21:25:15 2012
New Revision: 187027
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=187027
Log:
gcc/:
PR c/37303
* c-decl.c (build_c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37303
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||4.8.0
--- Comment #6 from Ian Lance Ta
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52684
--- Comment #3 from davem at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-05-01 22:27:11 UTC ---
Sadly, the bug is even more severe.
Even something as simple as:
long double f(long double a, long double b)
{
return a + b;
}
will be miscompiled with -O1 -ffloat-store
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52684
--- Comment #4 from davem at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-05-01 22:44:08 UTC ---
Ok, I see why 32-bit works. On 32-bit we use real libfuncs in the optabs, so
the compiler can see all the typing information and emit the proper information
to stick into the
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52847
--- Comment #3 from Daniel Richard G. 2012-05-01
23:01:28 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> You should not need -mminimal-toc because of this toplevel makefile part.
Ah, good to know. If I don't set -mminimal-toc in CC, I see this when larger
e
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52684
--- Comment #5 from davem at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-05-01 23:12:46 UTC ---
Strange, I added code to tack the function usage information onto
TFmode libcalls, but DSE still removes the stack slot stores :-/
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52586
--- Comment #9 from Matthias Klose 2012-05-01
23:14:15 UTC ---
Native configuration is mipsel-unknown-linux-gnu
=== libgo tests ===
Running target unix
FAIL: archive/zip
=== libgo Summary for unix ===
# of exp
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53115
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53181
Bug #: 53181
Summary: static_assert sees as non constant the comparison
between a constexpr and a template argument
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53177
Marc Glisse changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marc.glisse at normalesup
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53182
Bug #: 53182
Summary: GNU C: attributes without underscores should be
discouraged / no longer be documented e.g. as examples
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: un
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53183
Bug #: 53183
Summary: [4.7/4.8 Regression] libgcc does not always figure out
the size of double/long double
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
S
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52586
--- Comment #10 from Ian Lance Taylor 2012-05-02 04:33:56
UTC ---
I don't understand the archive/zip test failure. The files in question are
libgo/go/archive/zip/testdata/go-with-datadesc-sig.zip and
go-no-datadesc-sig.zip. They exist in the re
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53175
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Keywords|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53111
--- Comment #2 from Tobias Burnus 2012-05-02
06:08:20 UTC ---
Something like the following should work; it might require some refinement or
can be shorted. (Completely untested.)
--- a/gcc/fortran/resolve.c
+++ b/gcc/fortran/resolve.c
@@ -12015,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53184
Bug #: 53184
Summary: Unnecessary anonymous namespace warnings
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53185
Bug #: 53185
Summary: segmentation fault in vectorizable_load
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53185
--- Comment #1 from Gary Funck 2012-05-02 06:11:21
UTC ---
Created attachment 27281
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=27281
pre-processed source that demonstrates compiler segfault
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52586
--- Comment #11 from Andrew Pinski 2012-05-02
06:20:16 UTC ---
>getpwuid_r does not return any information.
There is a bug in the upstream glibc with respect of setregid setresgid
setresuid setreuid. I have a patch but I have not submitted them
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53184
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski 2012-05-02
06:25:50 UTC ---
>foo.cpp:5:16: warning: 'Bar' has a field 'Bar::foo' whose type uses the
anonymous namespace [enabled by default]
The warning just needs to be worded better but otherwise it is correc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48941
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|unassi
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53185
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||markus at trippelsdorf dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48941
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #24234|0 |1
is obsolete|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53184
--- Comment #2 from Orgad Shaneh 2012-05-02 06:56:28
UTC ---
Anonymous types shouldn't produce any warnings. They are very commonly used in
headers needed for both C and C++ projects. The warning is meant for types
inside anonymous namespaces, wh
55 matches
Mail list logo
