http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43631
--- Comment #17 from Igor Zamyatin 2012-12-10
08:02:54 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #15)
> But, double checking dwarf2out.c reveals that we could indeed emit the notes
> after BARRIER instead if there is any. So I'm leaning towards this p
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55636
--- Comment #1 from Tobias Burnus 2012-12-10
08:12:39 UTC ---
See thread starting at http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2012-10/msg6.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55636
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Status|UNCONFIRM
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55601
--- Comment #2 from Tobias Burnus 2012-12-10
08:41:36 UTC ---
Hmm, seemingly, the check ignores --disable-libquadmath-support by only testing
for C's __float support, cf. libgfortran/acinclude.m4's LIBGFOR_CHECK_FLOAT128.
gfortran itself
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55629
--- Comment #1 from Richard Biener 2012-12-10
08:50:12 UTC ---
I know that there is a duplicate of this bug, at least for a simpler
testcase ... but I can't find it right now.
The issue is that SCCVN does not do PHI-translation, that is,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55636
--- Comment #3 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-12-10 08:51:19 UTC ---
A patch was posted here:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2012-10/msg00028.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55633
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
--- C
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55635
--- Comment #2 from Kerrek SB 2012-12-10
09:08:46 UTC ---
Interesting, thank you!
The bug remains, however, both with -std=c++11 and noexcept(false), and with
-std=c++98 and throw(int).
Also, with noexcept(false) GCC will *not* call t
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55635
--- Comment #3 from Kerrek SB 2012-12-10
09:10:25 UTC ---
(Sorry, I meant "*without* noexcept(false)".)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55146
Oleg Endo changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55636
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-12-10
09:39:31 UTC ---
It could use something similar to what tree-emutls.c uses:
+#if !defined (NO_DOT_IN_LABEL)
+# define GFC_STRING_LENGTH_SEPARATOR "."
+#elif !defined (NO_DOLLAR_IN_LABEL)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55634
--- Comment #1 from Richard Biener 2012-12-10
09:40:59 UTC ---
Issue with the movmisalign instructions. They seem to take only a limited
set of modes, in particular not the mode that is requested.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55633
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Target Milestone|-
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55630
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Pri
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55624
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55618
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
--- C
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55623
--- Comment #8 from Richard Biener 2012-12-10
09:47:42 UTC ---
You can also adjust --param tree-reassoc-width or have the target implement
the sched.reassociation_width target hook (for the default).
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55107
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|una
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55619
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.8.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53912
--- Comment #32 from Kai Tietz 2012-12-10 09:53:13
UTC ---
Author: ktietz
Date: Mon Dec 10 09:53:08 2012
New Revision: 194348
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=194348
Log:
PR target/53912
* print-tree.c (p
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53912
--- Comment #33 from Kai Tietz 2012-12-10 09:54:20
UTC ---
Author: ktietz
Date: Mon Dec 10 09:54:16 2012
New Revision: 194349
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=194349
Log:
PR target/53912
* print-tree.c (p
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53912
--- Comment #34 from Kai Tietz 2012-12-10 09:57:06
UTC ---
Author: ktietz
Date: Mon Dec 10 09:57:02 2012
New Revision: 194350
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=194350
Log:
PR target/53912
* stmt.c (compute
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53912
Kai Tietz changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45050
Kai Tietz changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55635
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely 2012-12-10
10:37:29 UTC ---
G++ 4.7 doesn't call terminate because it doesn't implement
http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/cwg_defects.html#1123, but trunk
does.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55619
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55092
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-12-10
10:53:50 UTC ---
I believe on that testcase it was because without LRA the function didn't use a
frame pointer, while with LRA for some reason it does.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54402
--- Comment #18 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-12-10
10:56:51 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #16)
> Not on Solaris/SPARC, unfortunately: there are still compilations in the
> libgo testsuite that take more than a day, which with PR go/54507
> effe
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54128
--- Comment #14 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-12-10
10:57:53 UTC ---
Alex, any opinions here?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49372
Kai Tietz changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53208
Kai Tietz changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50895
--- Comment #4 from Kai Tietz 2012-12-10 11:21:04
UTC ---
A question about this build-failure. Were you using posix-threading model for
4.6 ?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55014
Kai Tietz changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38269
Kai Tietz changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55638
Bug #: 55638
Summary: Wrongly accepts INTENT + VALUE - and wrongly requires
it for PURE
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNC
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55618
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
Target Milestone|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55602
--- Comment #2 from Jeff Guo 2012-12-10 11:57:57
UTC ---
-pedantic-errors is helpful if the redefined macros not guarded by "#pragma GCC
system_header"
--a.h --
#pragma GCC system_header
#define A 1
#define A 2
-a.c
#include "
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55602
--- Comment #3 from Jeff Guo 2012-12-10 11:59:07
UTC ---
Above case is still no error message reported even with -pedantic-errors
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55602
Jeff Guo changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|VERIFIED
Resolution|INVALID
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53342
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Co
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55107
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Depends on||55629
--- Comment #3 from Rich
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53342
--- Comment #5 from rguenther at suse dot de
2012-12-10 12:26:21 UTC ---
On Mon, 10 Dec 2012, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53342
>
> Jakub Jelinek changed:
>
>What
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53475
gretay at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gretay at gcc dot gnu.o
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50895
--- Comment #5 from Ruben Van Boxem
2012-12-10 12:32:36 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> A question about this build-failure. Were you using posix-threading model for
> 4.6 ?
It's been a while, but I believe the 4.6 was normal win32
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55341
--- Comment #7 from Joost VandeVondele
2012-12-10 12:37:00 UTC ---
I'm wondering, is asan not supposed to print out a backtrace with file names
and line numbers... right now (trunk of today) I get a trace with just
addresses, I somehow hav
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55561
--- Comment #7 from Joost VandeVondele
2012-12-10 12:43:42 UTC ---
Now, compilation seems to go fine, but I'm not figuring out how to do it
properly so it works at run time. I have:
> gfortran -g -fsanitize=thread -fPIE PR55561.f90
>
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55341
Kostya Serebryany changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kcc at gcc dot gnu.org
---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55561
--- Comment #8 from Andrew Pinski 2012-12-10
12:46:56 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #7)
> Now, compilation seems to go fine, but I'm not figuring out how to do it
> properly so it works at run time. I have:
>
> > gfortran -g -fsanitize=
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55561
--- Comment #9 from Joost VandeVondele
2012-12-10 12:53:22 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #8)
> gfortran -g -fsanitize=thread -fPIC -pie PR55561.f90
Thanks! yields the proper warning as expected..
> gfortran -g -fopenmp -fsanitize=t
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55561
--- Comment #10 from Dmitry Vyukov 2012-12-10
12:57:01 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #9)
> (In reply to comment #8)
> > gfortran -g -fsanitize=thread -fPIC -pie PR55561.f90
>
> Thanks! yields the proper warning as expected..
>
> >
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55561
--- Comment #11 from Joost VandeVondele
2012-12-10 12:59:09 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #10)
> Is is a correct report? Or false positive?
This is a correct report for the testcase in comment #0 (as J is shared between
threads).
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49372
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely 2012-12-10
13:14:56 UTC ---
Kai, I don't think anyone disputes that B's constructor is called, the question
is why 12.2/4 doesn't apply.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55341
--- Comment #9 from Joost VandeVondele
2012-12-10 13:19:24 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #8)
> Joost:
> http://code.google.com/p/address-sanitizer/wiki/AddressSanitizer#Call_stack
No luck, even with -fno-omit-frame-pointer and the pytho
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55341
--- Comment #10 from Kostya Serebryany 2012-12-10
13:20:51 UTC ---
>> ./a.out | python ./asan_symbolize.py
It should be
./a.out 2>&1 | python ./asan_symbolize.py
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55079
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|una
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55639
Bug #: 55639
Summary: Partial nested template specialization leads to
segmentation fault of g++
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.2
Sta
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55341
--- Comment #11 from Joost VandeVondele
2012-12-10 13:26:31 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #10)
> >> ./a.out | python ./asan_symbolize.py
> It should be
> ./a.out 2>&1 | python ./asan_symbolize.py
not good yet, line numbers are 0. Al
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55341
--- Comment #12 from Kostya Serebryany 2012-12-10
13:28:12 UTC ---
Does pure addr2line work?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55633
--- Comment #3 from dave.anglin at bell dot net 2012-12-10 13:31:31 UTC ---
On 10-Dec-12, at 3:57 AM, burnus at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> Can you pin-point which version causes the regression?
At this point, I onnly know the test didn't f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55341
--- Comment #13 from Joost VandeVondele
2012-12-10 13:33:12 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #12)
> Does pure addr2line work?
No, the following (-gdwarf-3) does work:
gfortran -gdwarf-3 -O0 -fsanitize=address -fno-omit-frame-pointer asan_
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55639
--- Comment #1 from Paolo Carlini 2012-12-10
13:40:18 UTC ---
The issue is the 'template' keyword in:
SomeClass::template Fun
without it, the code is accepted (ICC also accepts it). I'm pretty sure this is
a Dup of another issue we al
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55341
--- Comment #14 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-12-10
13:41:16 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #11)
> > >> ./a.out | python ./asan_symbolize.py
> > I> =
> ==45957== ERROR: AddressSaniti
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49372
Kai Tietz changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55079
--- Comment #12 from Richard Biener 2012-12-10
13:50:15 UTC ---
For the testcase in comment#1 we have
Found new range for len_10: [1, 7]
Visiting statement:
len_17 = MIN_EXPR ;
Found new range for len_17: [0, +INF]
which shoul
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55341
--- Comment #15 from Joost VandeVondele
2012-12-10 13:56:02 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #14)
> That means your addr2line is too old.
OK, with binutils 2.23.1 things work as expected. In particular:
> gfortran -g -O0 -fsanitize=addres
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55107
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener 2012-12-10
14:00:39 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Dec 10 14:00:25 2012
New Revision: 194358
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=194358
Log:
2012-12-10 Richard Biener
P
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55107
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||4.8.0
Summary|[4.7/4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55079
--- Comment #13 from Richard Biener 2012-12-10
14:14:07 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #9)
> This is reduced testcase from gcov.c
> int a[8];
> int
> t (void)
> {
> int ix = 0;
> int k;
> int b = 0;
> int curr = 0;
> for (k = 0; k < 2; k
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55639
Michael Veksler changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||veksler at il dot ibm.com
---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55639
--- Comment #3 from Paolo Carlini 2012-12-10
14:23:16 UTC ---
It is, it is.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54814
--- Comment #10 from Georg-Johann Lay 2012-12-10
14:33:29 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #9)
> Created attachment 28900 [details]
> Candidate patch
>
> Try this.
It works. There are no more "spill in class 'R0_REG'" ICEs wozj your patc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55466
--- Comment #11 from hjl at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-12-10
14:44:00 UTC ---
Author: hjl
Date: Mon Dec 10 14:43:54 2012
New Revision: 194359
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=194359
Log:
Record the global variables if W
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55619
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-12-10
14:48:00 UTC ---
Created attachment 28913
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=28913
gcc48-pr55619.patch
Here is (untested) patch I had in mind. But perhaps we'd need to also
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55640
Bug #: 55640
Summary: --with-build-config=bootstrap-lto doesn't work with go
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: no
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55561
--- Comment #12 from Dmitry Vyukov 2012-12-10
15:07:11 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #11)
> (In reply to comment #10)
> > Is is a correct report? Or false positive?
>
> This is a correct report for the testcase in comment #0 (as J is sha
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52991
Kai Tietz changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55605
John David Anglin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55334
--- Comment #15 from Richard Biener 2012-12-10
15:33:38 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> Hmm, this does not help. The problem is indeed that we are not able to figure
> out that the accesses into subarrays of X are mutually independent.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55640
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55561
--- Comment #13 from Joost VandeVondele
2012-12-10 15:55:50 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #12)
> That's great that gcc tsan works for Fortran/OpenMP out of the box!
I'm afraid it yields false positives. Something like this is supposed to
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55079
--- Comment #14 from Jan Hubicka 2012-12-10 16:26:40
UTC ---
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55079
>
> --- Comment #13 from Richard Biener 2012-12-10
> 14:14:07 UTC ---
> (In reply to comment #9)
> > This is reduced
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55641
Bug #: 55641
Summary: debug info for the type of a reference declared with a
typedef has spurious 'const'
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55633
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek 2012-12-10
16:29:10 UTC ---
The test is really large, I guess it would be useful if you could try to reduce
the testcase as long as it still fails that BIT_SIZE(integer(8)) test.
Or can you step through
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55641
--- Comment #1 from David Blaikie 2012-12-10
16:29:47 UTC ---
Oh, and, tellingly, GCC (7.5) emits a DW_TAG_const_type in the DWARF data that
Clang does not emit, which seems to be the relevant difference here.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55466
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49372
--- Comment #5 from Johannes Schaub
2012-12-10 16:42:59 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> (In reply to comment #3)
> > Kai, I don't think anyone disputes that B's constructor is called, the
> > question
> > is why 12.2/4 doesn't apply.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55243
--- Comment #11 from Georg-Johann Lay 2012-12-10
17:00:50 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #10)
>> I don't know anything about the gnat build system and when I build avr-gcc I
>> configure for C/C++.
>>
>> What's odd is that even if GCC is
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55482
Jack Howarth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|x86_64-apple-darwin12 |x86_64-apple-darwin12,x86_6
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28586
David Edelsohn changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|powerpc-aix |powerpc-ibm-aix
Last reconfir
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55642
Bug #: 55642
Summary: [4.8 Regression] Invalid thumb code generated ("thumb
conditional instruction should be in IT block")
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Ver
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55641
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely 2012-12-10
17:24:15 UTC ---
Which version of GCC? (there is no 7.5)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55641
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55193
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Co
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55193
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|unas
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55243
--- Comment #12 from Eric Botcazou 2012-12-10
18:00:20 UTC ---
> LANG_MAKEFRAGS contains $(srcdir)/ada/gcc-interface/Make-lang.in which in turn
> contains:
>
> # put the host RTS dir first in the PATH to hide the default runtime
>
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55243
--- Comment #13 from Eric Botcazou 2012-12-10
18:02:19 UTC ---
Created attachment 28916
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=28916
Tentative fix for gnatls issue
To be applied in the ada/ source directory.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54324
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55481
--- Comment #14 from Zdenek Dvorak 2012-12-10
18:19:07 UTC ---
This is a problem in rewrite_use_nonlinear_expr, which should leave the
statement defining the biv untouched (as suggested in the comment at its
beginning) but does not. Inves
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55484
Jack Howarth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|x86_64-apple-darwin12 |x86_64-apple-darwin12,x86_6
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55243
--- Comment #14 from Georg-Johann Lay 2012-12-10
18:25:19 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #12)
> So t-multilib is autogenerated in the source tree during the build???
Jepp. Top $(srcdir)/gcc/config/avr/t-multilib reads:
# Auto-gener
1 - 100 of 136 matches
Mail list logo
