https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62298
--- Comment #2 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
*** Bug 62297 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62297
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62298
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62292
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Fri Aug 29 08:11:57 2014
New Revision: 214716
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=214716&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2014-08-29 Richard Biener
PR middle-end/62292
* gimple-fold
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62303
Bug ID: 62303
Summary: g++ 4.9.1 lto1: internal compiler error: Segmentation
fault
Product: gcc
Version: lto
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61484
--- Comment #3 from Paolo Carlini ---
This works in current mainline, I'm adding the testcase and closing the bug.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62303
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62026
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||smf.linux at ntlworld dot com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61484
--- Comment #4 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: paolo
Date: Fri Aug 29 08:41:16 2014
New Revision: 214718
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=214718&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2014-08-29 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/61484
* g++.dg/cpp0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55004
Bug 55004 depends on bug 61484, which changed state.
Bug 61484 Summary: [C++11] can't initialize constexpr multi-dimentional array
of a literal type
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61484
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61484
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62298
--- Comment #4 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
The ICE occurs in the functions string_lowercase, string_uppercase, and
string_replace, and it is the same as for the test in comment 5 of pr49802.
For the record, the attached test is a variant of th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62292
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62301
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |5.0
Summary|PowerPC bootstra
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62302
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |5.0
Summary|Change in the co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62300
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62299
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Mil
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62299
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61558
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||lucdanton at free dot fr
--- Comme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44735
--- Comment #5 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
This PR is fixed by the patch at
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2014-08/msg00114.html. Test that can be
executed:
subroutine bug
character(len=10) :: F_string
character(len=1), dimension(:), point
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60593
--- Comment #5 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
This PR is fixed by the patch at
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2014-08/msg00114.html. Test that can be
executed:
character(len=10), target :: c
character(len=:), pointer :: p
c = 'abcdefghij'
p => c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62026
--- Comment #5 from Stuart Foster ---
(In reply to Markus Trippelsdorf from comment #4)
> *** Bug 62303 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Which branch of gcc is this fix in ?
Thanks
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62026
--- Comment #6 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
(In reply to Stuart Foster from comment #5)
> (In reply to Markus Trippelsdorf from comment #4)
> > *** Bug 62303 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
>
> Which branch of gcc is this fix in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62258
Deniz Bahadir changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||D.Bahadir at GMX dot de
--- Comment #3 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62298
--- Comment #5 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
Workaround: replace
res = this
with
res%buffer = this%buffer
res%length = this%len()
...other needed components
With these changes the code compiles, but I cann
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58678
--- Comment #60 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
(In reply to Jason Merrill from comment #59)
> (In reply to Markus Trippelsdorf from comment #58)
>
> These are breaking with -flto because make_decl_local clears DECL_COMDAT, so
> the check I added t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62291
Steven Bosscher changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62304
Bug ID: 62304
Summary: [5 regression] ICE in follow_jumps,
find_dead_or_set_registers
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62304
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |5.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62304
Dave Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dmalcolm at redhat dot com
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62304
--- Comment #2 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #1 from Dave Malcolm ---
> The crash in find_dead_or_set_registers is the one discussed in:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-08/msg02619.html
> and I introduced it
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60430
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59938
--- Comment #1 from Paolo Carlini ---
This is already fixed in mainline. I'm addding the testcase and closing the
bug.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59938
--- Comment #2 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: paolo
Date: Fri Aug 29 12:24:17 2014
New Revision: 214724
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=214724&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2014-08-29 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/59938
* g++.dg/cpp0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55004
Bug 55004 depends on bug 59938, which changed state.
Bug 59938 Summary: [C++11] Bogus "... is not a constant expression"
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59938
What|Removed |Added
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59938
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62305
Bug ID: 62305
Summary: throw segfaults on 64bit Cygwin
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: critical
Priority: P3
Component: c++
A
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62291
--- Comment #1 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Fri Aug 29 12:39:50 2014
New Revision: 214727
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=214727&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2014-08-29 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/62291
* tree
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57764
--- Comment #2 from Paolo Carlini ---
This is fixed in 4.9.0 and mainline. I'm adding the testcase and closing the
bug.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57764
--- Comment #3 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: paolo
Date: Fri Aug 29 12:47:19 2014
New Revision: 214728
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=214728&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2014-08-29 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/57764
* g++.dg/cpp0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55004
Bug 55004 depends on bug 57764, which changed state.
Bug 57764 Summary: class static constexpr variables cannot be references
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57764
What|Removed |Added
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57764
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62291
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
As said in the mail for the just applied patch:
"The second patch (once done) will refactor insertion phase
to do a dominator walk similar to what elimination does
computing AVAIL_OUT on-the-fly (and only k
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62026
--- Comment #7 from Stuart Foster ---
(In reply to Markus Trippelsdorf from comment #6)
> (In reply to Stuart Foster from comment #5)
> > (In reply to Markus Trippelsdorf from comment #4)
> > > *** Bug 62303 has been marked as a duplicate of this
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56991
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55004
Bug 55004 depends on bug 56991, which changed state.
Bug 56991 Summary: constexpr std::initializer_list rejects too complex
initialization
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56991
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56991
--- Comment #6 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: paolo
Date: Fri Aug 29 13:12:02 2014
New Revision: 214729
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=214729&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2014-08-29 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/56991
* g++.dg/cpp0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62301
--- Comment #2 from Bill Schmidt ---
Example backtrace for segv:
#0 0x4d5a28a0 in ?? ()
#1 0x10370128 in mem_loc_descriptor(rtx_def*, machine_mode,
machine_mode, var_init_status) ()
#2 0x103704f4 in mem_loc_descriptor(
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55004
Bug 55004 depends on bug 54126, which changed state.
Bug 54126 Summary: ICE on constexpr move ctor with const ref type instead of
error
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54126
What|Removed |Added
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54126
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62301
--- Comment #3 from Bill Schmidt ---
Looks like a subtle logic change in the patch:
+ FOR_EACH_SUBRTX (iter, array, body, ALL)
+if (const_rtx y = *iter)
+ {
+ /* Check if a label_ref Y refers to label X. */
+ if (GET_CODE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62301
--- Comment #4 from Bill Schmidt ---
Unfortunately that was not sufficient -- same SEGVs are still occurring.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62306
Bug ID: 62306
Summary: [4.9/5 Regression?] Change in the comdat used for
constructors
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62307
Bug ID: 62307
Summary: -fsanitize=undefined doesn't pay attention to
__attribute__((returns_nonnull))
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62281
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ro at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone|-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62307
Marc Glisse changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
--- Comment #1 from Ma
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62301
rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62308
Bug ID: 62308
Summary: A bug with aarch64 big-endian
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: major
Priority: P3
Component: rtl-optimization
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62281
--- Comment #7 from joseph at codesourcery dot com ---
FWIW, I recommended to Sun in Mar 2006 that the kernel should ensure
16-byte alignment for both signal handlers and process startup (apparently
this resulted in Sun bug 6397812, "Problem wi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62304
--- Comment #3 from Dave Malcolm ---
Do you have preprocessed source handy for the reorg.c crash?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62248
--- Comment #3 from Yvan Roux ---
Author: yroux
Date: Fri Aug 29 15:41:52 2014
New Revision: 214731
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=214731&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2014-08-29 Yvan Roux
Backport from mainline
2014-08-27 Yv
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62301
--- Comment #6 from Bill Schmidt ---
Ah...I've been staring at the two versions for so long and that never leaped
out at me. :) Thanks, Richard!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62248
Yvan Roux changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62307
--- Comment #2 from Zack Weinberg ---
(In reply to Marc Glisse from comment #1)
> -fsanitize=null seems to imply -fno-delete-null-pointer-checks, so I assume
> this is on purpose. It would actually be quite natural for the sanitizer to
> insert a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62301
--- Comment #7 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
---
Author: rsandifo
Date: Fri Aug 29 15:51:13 2014
New Revision: 214733
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=214733&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
gcc/
PR bootstrap/62301
* rtlanal.c (rtx_referen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54002
--- Comment #4 from Paolo Carlini ---
I'm adding the testcase to the testsuite and closing the bug.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62301
rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolutio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62304
--- Comment #4 from Dave Malcolm ---
(In reply to Dave Malcolm from comment #3)
> Do you have preprocessed source handy for the reorg.c crash?
No need; I've reproduced it locally now.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54002
--- Comment #5 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: paolo
Date: Fri Aug 29 15:58:26 2014
New Revision: 214734
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=214734&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2014-08-29 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/54002
* g++.dg/cpp0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54002
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55004
Bug 55004 depends on bug 54002, which changed state.
Bug 54002 Summary: [C++0x] Initializing constexpr static member using constexpr
static method fails
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54002
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62301
--- Comment #9 from Bill Schmidt ---
Thanks, Richard!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58678
--- Comment #61 from Jason Merrill ---
Yes, for 4.9 probably better to remove the DECL_COMDAT check from
ipa_visibility; there's really no need for it, as all artificial virtuals are
implicitly inline and thus would always have DECL_COMDAT set if
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61078
--- Comment #7 from Andreas Krebbel ---
(In reply to jgreenhalgh from comment #6)
> As mentioned in the original patch submission [1], the effect is to allow
> removal the removal of temporary registers when shuffling arguments for a
> call.
Ok.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62304
--- Comment #5 from Dave Malcolm ---
Created attachment 33416
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=33416&action=edit
Candidate patch. Bootstrapped on x86_64; seems to work on stage1 cris and
sparc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58678
--- Comment #62 from Jason Merrill ---
Created attachment 33417
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=33417&action=edit
Patch #5
Like so. This patch fixes the bug in both 4.9 and trunk, but only when the
linker plugin isn't used.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58678
--- Comment #63 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
Hmm, I've tested the following with 4.9 branch:
diff --git a/gcc/ipa.c b/gcc/ipa.c
index ebaa82dbfe41..b55b8ccab4ac 100644
--- a/gcc/ipa.c
+++ b/gcc/ipa.c
@@ -980,11 +980,6 @@ function_and_variable_vi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58678
--- Comment #64 from Jason Merrill ---
(In reply to Markus Trippelsdorf from comment #63)
I expect my patch will also fix it for you, then.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54418
John Paul Adrian Glaubitz changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||glaubitz at physik dot
fu-be
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43744
John Paul Adrian Glaubitz changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||glaubitz at physik dot
fu-be
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54418
--- Comment #7 from John Paul Adrian Glaubitz ---
(In reply to John Paul Adrian Glaubitz from comment #6)
>
> The full buildlog can be found here [1].
Forgot the actual link:
http://buildd.debian-ports.org/status/fetch.php?pkg=postgresql-9.4&arc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62309
Bug ID: 62309
Summary: -fno-automatic with -finit-local prevents
initialization of automatics in recursive functions
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.3
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62309
Fritz Reese changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||fritzoreese at gmail dot com
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62306
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62215
--- Comment #8 from Janne Blomqvist ---
Author: jb
Date: Fri Aug 29 20:46:15 2014
New Revision: 214742
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=214742&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR 62215 Reinstate unlinking old module file before renaming.
2014-08-29
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62215
--- Comment #9 from Janne Blomqvist ---
Author: jb
Date: Fri Aug 29 20:49:16 2014
New Revision: 214743
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=214743&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR 62215 Unlink old module file before renaming.
2014-08-29 Jeffrey Armst
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57125
Andrew Oakley changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||andrew at ado dot is-a-geek.net
--- Comm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62307
--- Comment #3 from Alexey Samsonov ---
FYI, Jakub has proposed a patch to add additional check to -fsanitize=undefined
that would specifically sanitize functions with returns_nonnull attribute:
however, it would sanitize bodies of the function a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62302
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62215
Janne Blomqvist changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62304
--- Comment #6 from Steve Ellcey ---
(In reply to Dave Malcolm from comment #5)
> Created attachment 33416 [details]
> Candidate patch. Bootstrapped on x86_64; seems to work on stage1 cris and
> sparc
This patch fixed my MIPS build. I am runni
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62310
Bug ID: 62310
Summary: fails to consider default initializers (NSDMIs) when
checking inheriting constructors
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
S
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62311
Bug ID: 62311
Summary: Found a potential copy and paste issue on in
gcc/config/cr16.c
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57125
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Oakley ---
Sorry, this patch doesn't seem sufficient (perhaps I was just lucky for a
while). Apologies for the noise.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43744
Kazumoto Kojima changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||
--- Comment #13 from Kazumoto Kojima
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62310
Paul Pluzhnikov changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ppluzhnikov at google dot com
--- Comm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62312
Bug ID: 62312
Summary: [4.9/5 Regression] [SH] Invalid operands for opcode
div0s
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: wrong-code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54418
--- Comment #8 from Kazumoto Kojima ---
(In reply to John Paul Adrian Glaubitz from comment #6)
> I'm seeing this issue again when compiling postgresql-9.4 with gcc-4.9.1,
> but I am not sure whether the issues are related.
I've filed a new PR62
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43744
--- Comment #14 from John Paul Adrian Glaubitz ---
Hi Kazumoto!
(In reply to Kazumoto Kojima from comment #13)
> (In reply to John Paul Adrian Glaubitz from comment #12)
> > I'm seeing this issue again when compiling binutils-2.24.51.20140818 wi
99 matches
Mail list logo
