http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35634
Jaak Ristioja changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jaak at ristioja dot ee
--- Com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55354
--- Comment #14 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-11-19
08:54:47 UTC ---
I bet 9.5% or more of that is due to the PLT call. The thing is, even when you
have initial-exec TLS model code, if you link it into an executable and the
referenced TLS varia
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55354
--- Comment #15 from Konstantin Serebryany 2012-11-19 09:03:35 UTC ---
You are right that "-fPIC -ftls-model=initial-exec" does not affect performance
if we link libtsan statically (I checked).
As you say, the linker nukes one of the load
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55354
--- Comment #16 from Konstantin Serebryany 2012-11-19 09:06:26 UTC ---
So, using "-fPIC -ftls-model=initial-exec" is a great idea, it will allow
to build the files once and have both static and dynamic library.
But we need to agree that th
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51358
--- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-11-19
09:09:59 UTC ---
I don't see the link between the bugreport and dwarf4, why do you think this is
a regression?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55388
Bug #: 55388
Summary: [4.8 regression] ICE in int_mode_for_mode at
stor-layout.c:423 breaks sparc64-linux bootstrap
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55352
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|Erroneous gfortran warning |[4.7/4.8 Regression]
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55370
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55315
--- Comment #2 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-11-19 09:35:53 UTC ---
Author: vries
Date: Mon Nov 19 09:35:48 2012
New Revision: 193616
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=193616
Log:
2012-11-19 Tom de Vries
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55315
--- Comment #3 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-11-19 09:35:59 UTC ---
Author: vries
Date: Mon Nov 19 09:35:54 2012
New Revision: 193617
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=193617
Log:
2012-11-19 Tom de Vries
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55236
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.8.0
Summary|[4.8 Re
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55315
vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resol
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55329
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55313
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |REOPENED
--- Comment #5 from Er
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55389
Bug #: 55389
Summary: library cannot be rebuilt by make all-target
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11219
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11571
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36367
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|NEW
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55390
Bug #: 55390
Summary: [4.8 Regression] Error when building with -mfpmath=sse
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: no
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55391
Bug #: 55391
Summary: [4.8 regression] ICE in adjust_address_1 at
emit-rtl.c:2180 breaks bulding cross to sparc64-linux
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54128
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||aoliva at gcc dot gnu.org,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55392
Bug #: 55392
Summary: Internal compiler error in get_expr_operands, c++11
without optimization
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Stat
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55354
--- Comment #17 from Dmitry Vyukov 2012-11-19
10:53:04 UTC ---
>When building libtsan as a shared library (for which I had to hack our assembly
>blobs a bit) we get two sources of slowdown:
> 1. __tsan_read8 and friends are called throug
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55390
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55393
Bug #: 55393
Summary: gcc/g++ multiplies two unsigned integers using the
IMULQ instruction
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55359
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51242
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely 2012-11-19
11:47:20 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> Is this bug planned to be fixed in future?
Yes, of course. It's a bug.
> Can I help in any way to do that?
Sure, you could look in gcc/cp/*.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55391
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ebotcazou at gcc dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51242
--- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely 2012-11-19
11:52:38 UTC ---
The check is for an unscoped enumeration type which does seem intentional.
This change allows the example to compile:
--- cp/decl2.c.orig 2012-11-19 11:50:28.842443803
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52289
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53764
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54067
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|translation |target
--- Comment #3 from Jo
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55392
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52284
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55391
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55342
--- Comment #2 from Yuri Rumyantsev 2012-11-19
12:06:20 UTC ---
The patching compiler produces better binaries but we still have -6%
performance degradation on corei7. The main cause of it it that LRA compiler
generates spill of 'pure' byt
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55368
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|unas
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55392
--- Comment #2 from David Fendrich 2012-11-19
12:19:55 UTC ---
Created attachment 28730
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=28730
Lzma compressed .ii file from -save-temps
I attached this file uncompressed to the origina
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55394
Bug #: 55394
Summary: Using call_once without -lpthread compiles without
warning
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.3
Status: UNCONFIRME
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55391
--- Comment #3 from Mikael Pettersson 2012-11-19
12:38:47 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> It's http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2012-11/msg00548.html
My bisection identified the same rev (193601).
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52576
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54207
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
Targe
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55392
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||markus at trippelsdorf dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55389
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55389
--- Comment #2 from Paolo Bonzini 2012-11-19 13:05:51
UTC ---
Can you post the full log of a rm+make?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55392
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |UNCONFIRMED
Ever Confirmed
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54325
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41958
--- Comment #9 from Jason Merrill 2012-11-19
13:42:06 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #8)
> The note describing the resolution of 1395 says "preferring an omitted
> parameter over a parameter pack".
"omitted parameter" here means no parame
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54630
--- Comment #11 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-11-19
13:44:21 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Mon Nov 19 13:44:15 2012
New Revision: 193620
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=193620
Log:
PR middle-end/54630
* tree-ssa
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55394
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
--- Comment #1 fr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55333
Konstantin Serebryany changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||konstantin.s.serebryany at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55393
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Co
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55261
--- Comment #1 from Jason Merrill 2012-11-19
14:05:46 UTC ---
Author: jason
Date: Mon Nov 19 14:05:36 2012
New Revision: 193621
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=193621
Log:
PR c++/55261
* class.c (add_imp
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55262
--- Comment #1 from Jason Merrill 2012-11-19
14:05:58 UTC ---
Author: jason
Date: Mon Nov 19 14:05:48 2012
New Revision: 193622
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=193622
Log:
PR c++/55262
* method.c (implic
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54329
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55368
--- Comment #2 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-11-19 14:41:33 UTC ---
Author: paolo
Date: Mon Nov 19 14:41:26 2012
New Revision: 193624
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=193624
Log:
/cp
2012-11-19 Paolo Carlin
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55368
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55261
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55262
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55394
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|c++ |libstdc++
--- Comment #2 from P
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55392
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53137
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||david at aitellu dot com
--- Co
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55276
David Edelsohn changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55351
--- Comment #1 from Nick Clifton 2012-11-19 16:01:36
UTC ---
Created attachment 28732
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=28732
Fixes to allow libgcc to build for the sh64-linux target
I am no SH expert, so this patch ma
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55389
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-11-19
16:10:38 UTC ---
Created attachment 28733
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=28733
log
rm -rf x86_64-*/{,32/}libsanitizer; make all-target-libsanitizer
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55252
--- Comment #6 from dodji at seketeli dot org
2012-11-19 16:17:20 UTC ---
> I think this his how the macro expansion was designed to work: It
> shows the location of the token that triggered the error.
Yes. And there are cases where the GCC wa
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55355
Richard Perrin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53764
--- Comment #1 from ian at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-11-19
16:28:17 UTC ---
Author: ian
Date: Mon Nov 19 16:28:04 2012
New Revision: 193626
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=193626
Log:
PR translation/53764
compile
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53764
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51242
--- Comment #7 from Vladimir 2012-11-19 16:31:15
UTC ---
OK, I will see this message soon.
P.S. For now, I have to use Intel Compiller, which isn't good due limited
platform support (x86 and amd64).
---Исходное сообщение---
От: "redi at gcc dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55252
--- Comment #7 from dodji at seketeli dot org
2012-11-19 16:34:11 UTC ---
"manu at gcc dot gnu.org" a écrit:
> On the other hand, let's consider:
> pr55252.c:
>
> #define bar 256
> #include "pr55252.h"
>
> pr55252.h:
>
> #pragma GCC system_hea
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54083
--- Comment #11 from Dominique d'Humieres
2012-11-19 16:48:30 UTC ---
Author:hjl
Date:Mon Nov 5 21:59:49 2012 UTC (13 days, 18 hours ago)
New Revision: 193193
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=revision&sortby=date&revision=19
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55252
--- Comment #8 from Manuel López-Ibáñez 2012-11-19
16:50:34 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #7)
> Would that make sense in the grand scheme of things?
The idea seems good. It would also handle comment #4 testcase. However, I am
not sure how you wo
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55276
--- Comment #3 from David Edelsohn 2012-11-19 16:58:42
UTC ---
Author: dje
Date: Mon Nov 19 16:58:31 2012
New Revision: 193628
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=193628
Log:
2012-11-19 Mans Rullgard
PR
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54083
Jack Howarth changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||howarth at nitro dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55252
--- Comment #9 from dodji at seketeli dot org
2012-11-19 17:05:57 UTC ---
"manu at gcc dot gnu.org" a écrit:
> Hum, I am not sure why the macro unwinder avoids unwinding if the
> macro comes from a system-header. If a warning message comes fro
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55252
--- Comment #10 from dodji at seketeli dot org
2012-11-19 17:18:00 UTC ---
"manu at gcc dot gnu.org" a écrit:
> The idea seems good. It would also handle comment #4 testcase.
Yeah, and I think it would be a step in the direction of printing r
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55355
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55355
--- Comment #7 from Richard Perrin 2012-11-19
17:24:14 UTC ---
So 4.6 branch is dead? Or no more i386 support?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55355
--- Comment #8 from Paolo Carlini 2012-11-19
17:25:08 UTC ---
Note that, as I said already, I can't reproduce anywhere, not even in current
4_6-branch (on x86_64-linux -m32). Did you actually try it?
=compile
/build/buildd/gcc-4.8-4.8-20121119/build/./gcc/xgcc
-B/build/buildd/gcc-4.8-4.8-20121119/build/./gcc/ -B/usr/powerpc-linux-gnu/bin/
-B/usr/powerpc-linux-gnu/lib/ -isystem /usr/powerpc-linux-gnu/include -isystem
/usr/powerpc-linux-gnu/sys-include-DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I.
-I../../../src
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55094
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|unas
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55381
Pat Haugen changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pthaugen at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Co
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55384
--- Comment #6 from David Edelsohn 2012-11-19 18:07:35
UTC ---
Author: dje
Date: Mon Nov 19 18:07:21 2012
New Revision: 193629
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=193629
Log:
Add PR bootstrap/55384 to ChangeLog entry
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54921
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-11-19
18:07:33 UTC ---
Created attachment 28735
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=28735
gcc48-pr54921.patch
Untested updated patch.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55384
David Edelsohn changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55276
David Edelsohn changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
--- Comment #4 from Da
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55360
--- Comment #2 from Chris King 2012-11-19
18:47:39 UTC ---
Possibly, though I doubt it. PR 28831 has more to do with eliding copies of
the struct in its entirety; the problem I'm having centers around accessing
individual elements. If PR
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32647
Uros Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vmakarov at gcc dot gnu.org
K
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55359
--- Comment #2 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-11-19 19:00:01 UTC ---
Sorry for the breakage.
(In reply to comment #1)
> Caused by http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=192741
> lowpart_bit_field_p looks weird, I don't
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55359
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-11-19
19:11:29 UTC ---
Guess it is ok.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55359
rsand...@gcc.gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assigned
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55385
Daniel Krügler changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||daniel.kruegler at
|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55142
--- Comment #38 from hjl at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-11-19
19:17:17 UTC ---
Author: hjl
Date: Mon Nov 19 19:17:05 2012
New Revision: 193635
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=193635
Log:
Workaround PR middle-end/55142
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55388
--- Comment #1 from Mikael Pettersson 2012-11-19
19:32:37 UTC ---
Fails at r193600 so not the same reason as PR55391. Bisecting...
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55367
--- Comment #6 from walid riabi 2012-11-19 19:48:12
UTC ---
I'm a candidate:)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55396
Bug #: 55396
Summary: -O2 -m32 -fno-omit-frame-pointer: internal compiler
error: in check_rtl, at lra.c:2007
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55313
--- Comment #6 from H.J. Lu 2012-11-19 20:54:53
UTC ---
It works for me on Fedora 17 with
--enable-clocale=gnu --with-system-zlib --with-demangler-in-ld
--enable-languages=c,ada,c++ --prefix=/usr/gcc-4.8.0
--with-local-prefix=/usr/loca
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55397
Bug #: 55397
Summary: [asan] -faddress-sanitizer should define a CPP macro
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: norm
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54795
--- Comment #13 from H.J. Lu 2012-11-19 21:04:12
UTC ---
On hjl/asan branch, I got
(gdb) r
Starting program:
/export/build/gnu/gcc-lto-asan/build-x86_64-linux/prev-gcc/cc1 -fpreprocessed
/tmp/x.i -quiet -dumpbase x.i -mtune=generic -ma
1 - 100 of 168 matches
Mail list logo