[Bug bootstrap/53468] debian/ubuntu changed the location of libraries on the disk which broke bootstrap

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53468 --- Comment #3 from Matthias Klose 2012-08-07 10:29:45 UTC --- Comment on attachment 27825 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=27825 multiarch-2012-07-08 >2012-06-25 Matthias Klose > > * doc/invoke.texi: Document -print-

[Bug c++/54191] New: [C++11] SFINAE does not handle conversion to inaccessible base

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54191 Bug #: 54191 Summary: [C++11] SFINAE does not handle conversion to inaccessible base Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c++/54191] [C++11] SFINAE does not handle conversion to inaccessible base

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54191 --- Comment #1 from Ai Azuma 2012-08-07 11:19:03 UTC --- Created attachment 27955 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=27955 Some test cases for SFINAE on conversion to inaccessible base

[Bug c++/54191] [C++11] SFINAE does not handle conversion to inaccessible base

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54191 --- Comment #2 from Ai Azuma 2012-08-07 11:21:36 UTC --- Created attachment 27956 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=27956 Output of -v option

[Bug tree-optimization/54146] Very slow compile with attribute((flatten))

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54146 Richard Guenther changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment

[Bug c++/54191] [C++11] SFINAE does not handle conversion to inaccessible base

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54191 Paolo Carlini changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/54191] [C++11] SFINAE does not handle conversion to inaccessible base

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54191 Paolo Carlini changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|unassigned at

[Bug other/54182] -fPIE -pie shouldn't disable -fvisibility=hidden

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54182 wbrana changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords|build | Summary|enable -fvisibility=hidden

[Bug c/54192] New: -fno-trapping-math by default?

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54192 Bug #: 54192 Summary: -fno-trapping-math by default? Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3

[Bug c/54192] -fno-trapping-math by default?

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54192 --- Comment #1 from Richard Guenther 2012-08-07 12:50:16 UTC --- The current reasoning is that the C standard allows the implementation to say that only round-to-nearest is supported but not that the trapping parts of IEEE are not honored. The d

[Bug c/54192] -fno-trapping-math by default?

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54192 --- Comment #2 from Marc Glisse 2012-08-07 13:13:46 UTC --- Don't you need to tell the compiler (with the FENV_ACCESS pragma) that you are going to look at flags, just like you tell it that you are going to use non-default rounding modes? "In ge

[Bug middle-end/54193] New: dump_gimple_assign raw can't handle 4 operands

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54193 Bug #: 54193 Summary: dump_gimple_assign raw can't handle 4 operands Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: minor Prio

[Bug c++/54191] [C++11] SFINAE does not handle conversion to inaccessible base

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54191 --- Comment #5 from Paolo Carlini 2012-08-07 14:36:19 UTC --- For the cases where we are producing inaccessible base diagnostics in SFINAE context, the issue is that lookup_base is called by functions getting a complain argument always in the sam

[Bug middle-end/54193] dump_gimple_assign raw can't handle 4 operands

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54193 Richard Guenther changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c++/54194] New: GCC 4.8 gives misleading suggestion about arithmetic in operand of '|'

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54194 Bug #: 54194 Summary: GCC 4.8 gives misleading suggestion about arithmetic in operand of '|' Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0 Status: UNCONFIR

[Bug c++/54194] GCC 4.8 gives misleading suggestion about arithmetic in operand of '|'

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54194 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||diagnostic Status|UNCONFIRM

[Bug fortran/54195] New: [4.8 Regression][OOP] IMPORT fails with GENERIC TBP: "is already present in the interface"

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54195 Bug #: 54195 Summary: [4.8 Regression][OOP] IMPORT fails with GENERIC TBP: "is already present in the interface" Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0

[Bug fortran/54195] [4.8 Regression][OOP] IMPORT fails with GENERIC TBP: "is already present in the interface"

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54195 Tobias Burnus changed: What|Removed |Added CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org Target Milest

[Bug fortran/54195] [4.8 Regression][OOP] IMPORT fails with GENERIC TBP: "is already present in the interface"

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54195 janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug fortran/54195] [4.8 Regression][OOP] IMPORT fails with GENERIC TBP: "is already present in the interface"

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54195 --- Comment #2 from Tobias Burnus 2012-08-07 16:47:10 UTC --- It works with the snapshot GCC 4.8.0 20120624 and fails with the one from 20120701. The changelog lists only one entry in that period, namely: Author: janus Date: Wed Jun 27 17:38:00

[Bug fortran/54195] [4.8 Regression][OOP] IMPORT fails with GENERIC TBP: "is already present in the interface"

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54195 --- Comment #3 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-08-07 18:12:07 UTC --- (In reply to comment #2) > The changelog lists only one entry in that period, namely: > > Author: janus > Date: Wed Jun 27 17:38:00 2012 > New Revision: 189022 Yeah, I knew

[Bug debug/53135] [4.7/4.8 Regression] internal compiler error: in value_format, at dwarf2out.c:8010

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53135 --- Comment #8 from Alexandre Oliva 2012-08-07 18:47:16 UTC --- For those running into the problem, analternative to patching GCC isto reduce the maximum expression depth for var-traking with --param max-vartrack-expr-depth=11

[Bug c++/54196] New: gcc doesn't find incompatible exception specification for operator

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54196 Bug #: 54196 Summary: gcc doesn't find incompatible exception specification for operator Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c++/54197] New: [4.7/4.8 regression] Lifetime of reference not properly extended

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54197 Bug #: 54197 Summary: [4.7/4.8 regression] Lifetime of reference not properly extended Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c++/54196] gcc doesn't find incompatible exception specification for operator

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54196 --- Comment #1 from mib.bugzilla at gmail dot com 2012-08-07 18:57:28 UTC --- Using built-in specs. COLLECT_GCC=gcc COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/site/spt/rdrive/ref/gcc/4.7.0/efi2/bin/../libexec/gcc/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/4.7.0/lto-wrapper Target: x86_64

[Bug c++/54194] GCC 4.8 gives misleading suggestion about arithmetic in operand of '|'

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54194 --- Comment #2 from Manuel López-Ibáñez 2012-08-07 19:35:45 UTC --- Use warning_at and pass down the correct location of the operator if possible, otherwise input_location? Of course, it would be nice to have ranges but I have given up on that.

[Bug c++/54197] [4.7/4.8 regression] Lifetime of reference not properly extended

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54197 H.J. Lu changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug tree-optimization/54146] Very slow compile with attribute((flatten))

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54146 --- Comment #28 from Steven Bosscher 2012-08-07 19:58:00 UTC --- To illustrate the rewrite_into_closed_loop_ssa problem, consider this test case: extern void use1 (int); extern void use2 (int); extern int confuse_loop (void); void foo (void) {

[Bug debug/54177] [4.8 Regression]: Segfault in cselib_lookup due to NULL_RTX passed from vt_add_function_parameter

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54177 --- Comment #3 from Alexandre Oliva 2012-08-07 20:08:27 UTC --- Having reviewed teh other uses of var_lowpart, I hereby approve the patch if it passes regstrap. Thanks!

[Bug fortran/54195] [4.8 Regression][OOP] IMPORT fails with GENERIC TBP: "is already present in the interface"

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54195 --- Comment #4 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-08-07 20:23:26 UTC --- My first attempt to fix it would be something like this: Index: gcc/fortran/resolve.c === --- gcc/fortran/reso

[Bug middle-end/54114] [4.8 Regression] variable-tracking performance regression from 4.8-20120610 to 4.8-20120701

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54114 --- Comment #4 from Alexandre Oliva 2012-08-07 20:28:05 UTC --- It seems quite clear to me that the new cost arises due to clobber_overlapping_mems, a relatively expensive operation that fixes a debug info correctness bug and that we just didn't

[Bug libstdc++/53579] libstdc++ configure atomicity tests use CXXFLAGS instead of CXXFLAGS_FOR_TARGET

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53579 Benjamin Kosnik changed: What|Removed |Added CC||bkoz at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #1

[Bug c++/54196] gcc doesn't find incompatible exception specification for operator

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54196 --- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely 2012-08-07 20:55:36 UTC --- N.B. there are various overloads of operator new that are implicitly declared in every translation unit, including (in C++03) void* operator new(std::size_t) throw(std::bad_alloc)

[Bug fortran/54195] [4.8 Regression][OOP] IMPORT fails with GENERIC TBP: "is already present in the interface"

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54195 janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|una

[Bug debug/54177] [4.8 Regression]: Segfault in cselib_lookup due to NULL_RTX passed from vt_add_function_parameter

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54177 --- Comment #4 from Uros Bizjak 2012-08-07 21:07:53 UTC --- Author: uros Date: Tue Aug 7 20:57:56 2012 New Revision: 190212 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=190212 Log: * var-tracking.c (var_lowpart): Exit early for mat

[Bug debug/54177] [4.8 Regression]: Segfault in cselib_lookup due to NULL_RTX passed from vt_add_function_parameter

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54177 Uros Bizjak changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED URL|

[Bug fortran/54195] [4.8 Regression][OOP] IMPORT fails with GENERIC TBP: "is already present in the interface"

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54195 --- Comment #6 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-08-07 21:21:23 UTC --- (In reply to comment #4) > However: Witout the patch, the code guarded by the IF statement above is > called > twice (which leads to the error). But with the patch, it is not

[Bug fortran/54195] [4.8 Regression][OOP] IMPORT fails with GENERIC TBP: "is already present in the interface"

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54195 --- Comment #7 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-08-07 22:05:49 UTC --- (In reply to comment #5) > Will start a full regtest now ... Completed successfully.

[Bug tree-optimization/54146] Very slow compile with attribute((flatten))

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54146 --- Comment #29 from Steven Bosscher 2012-08-07 22:28:11 UTC --- Created attachment 27957 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=27957 Do not traverse sibling loops The idea here is to note that for a nested loop we know for sure th

[Bug c++/53661] [gcc-4.7/4.8 regression] Wrong narrowing conversion warning with -std=c++11

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53661 Sriraman Tallam changed: What|Removed |Added Component|c |c++ Summary|Wrong narrowing

[Bug tree-optimization/54146] Very slow compile with attribute((flatten))

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54146 --- Comment #30 from Steven Bosscher 2012-08-07 22:36:30 UTC --- > Created attachment 27957 [details] With the attachment, time spent in rewrite_into_loop_closed_ssa is almost 0 (and that includes the time in the verifier). Compile time for the

[Bug libstdc++/54005] Use __atomic_always_lock_free in libstdc++ is_lock_free instead of __atomic_is_lock_free

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54005 --- Comment #1 from Benjamin Kosnik 2012-08-07 23:04:05 UTC --- Author: bkoz Date: Tue Aug 7 23:03:55 2012 New Revision: 190216 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=190216 Log: 2012-08-07 Benjamin Kosnik PR libstdc++/54

[Bug tree-optimization/54146] Very slow compile with attribute((flatten))

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54146 --- Comment #31 from Steven Bosscher 2012-08-08 06:28:16 UTC --- Author: steven Date: Wed Aug 8 06:28:10 2012 New Revision: 190222 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=190222 Log: PR middle-end/54146 * ifcvt.c: Include

[Bug tree-optimization/54146] Very slow compile with attribute((flatten))

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54146 --- Comment #31 from Steven Bosscher 2012-08-08 06:28:16 UTC --- Author: steven Date: Wed Aug 8 06:28:10 2012 New Revision: 190222 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=190222 Log: PR middle-end/54146 * ifcvt.c: Include

[Bug middle-end/54146] Very slow compile with attribute((flatten))

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54146 Steven Bosscher changed: What|Removed |Added Component|tree-optimization |middle-end --- Comment #31 from Steven

[Bug middle-end/54146] Very slow compile with attribute((flatten))

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54146 Steven Bosscher changed: What|Removed |Added Component|tree-optimization |middle-end --- Comment #32 from Steven