https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69038
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||davem at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #8
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68991
--- Comment #15 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #11)
> (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #10)
> > But why should the *mov_internal use Bm or vector_operand? It
> > can/should handle both aligned and unaligned memor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68991
--- Comment #16 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #15)
> (In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #11)
> > (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #10)
> > > But why should the *mov_internal use Bm or vector_operand? It
> > >
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68991
--- Comment #17 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #15)
> IMNSHO you only want to touch patterns which don't have ssememalign
> attributes (== have it 0) and leave the others as is. Perhaps in the next
> step you can k
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69122
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |dmalcolm at gcc dot
gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69141
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66223
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #6
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69144
Bug ID: 69144
Summary: running the libgccjit tests leaves temporary files
/tmp/libgccjit-*
Product: gcc
Version: 5.3.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69064
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69145
Bug ID: 69145
Summary: [6 Regression] Bogus 'warning: #pragma implementation
for ‘...’ appears after file is included'
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67781
--- Comment #12 from Mikael Pettersson ---
Thanks for posting the patch, I'm currently doing a sparc64-linux bootstrap and
regtest with it.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69030
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69135
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||arm*
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69145
--- Comment #1 from Tobias Burnus ---
Test case (seems as if the file name of the included file matters):
$ g++ TDICmds.cc
TDICmds.cc:1:24: warning: #pragma implementation for
‘create_defect_script_SCDBase.cc’ appears after file is included
#p
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69012
--- Comment #13 from Bernd Edlinger ---
(In reply to Bernd Edlinger from comment #12)
>
> glibc-config:
> ../glibc-2.22/configure --prefix=/home/ed/gnu/mips-linux-gnu/mips-linux-gnu
> --build=mips-linux-gnu --disable-werror CC=mips-linux-gnu-gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69030
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Note, before *.ira the pseudo 93 set by the movsicc is actually used by another
insn, but that is removed early in the ira pass during
delete_trivially_dead_insns. But for some reason the if_then_else is not
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69135
--- Comment #3 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Richard Earnshaw from comment #1)
> Confirmed based on inspection.
>
> The patch suggested is not correct, since vcvtr can be conditional and it
> shares the same basic pattern.
In
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66655
--- Comment #7 from Nick Clifton ---
Author: nickc
Date: Tue Jan 5 10:57:01 2016
New Revision: 232071
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=232071&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/66655
* config/i386/cygming.h (MAKE_DECL_ONE_ONLY
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69011
vehre at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67779
Bug 67779 depends on bug 69011, which changed state.
Bug 69011 Summary: [6 Regression] [OOP] ICE in gfc_advance_chain for ALLOCATE
with SOURCE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69011
What|Removed |Ad
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69060
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Sławomir from comment #1)
> The same with version 4.9.4 20150813 (prerelease)
No, the error for your (incomplete, and so not very useful) example is not the
same at all.
> Error:
> CXX
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69060
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||rejects-valid
Status|UNCON
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69116
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||rejects-valid
Status|UNCON
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69114
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69105
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69106
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60304
--- Comment #24 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Martin Sebor from comment #23)
> What doesn't work correctly is including in the test case and
> compiling it in C++ 98 mode. The test case below shows there's still no
> warning there. Thi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69016
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64969
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||emailstorbala at gmail dot com
--- Com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68232
James Greenhalgh changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69145
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69145
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69053
alalaw01 at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69053
--- Comment #2 from alalaw01 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
build_vector_from_val then gets called to build a vector (4) unsigned long,
from an int* (which is the right signedness and size, but being a pointer it is
not types_compatible_p).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69123
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|2016-01-03 00:00:00
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69123
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||aoliva at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69146
Bug ID: 69146
Summary: [5 Regression] ICE in extract_insn, at recog.c:2343 on
powerpc64le-linux-gnu
Product: gcc
Version: 5.3.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: no
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69147
Bug ID: 69147
Summary: [5 Regression] Several hundred asan failures with
5.3.1 on x86_64-apple-darwin15
Product: gcc
Version: 5.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69148
Bug ID: 69148
Summary: [5/6 Regression] ICE (floating point exception) on
s390x-linux-gnu
Product: gcc
Version: 5.3.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68770
--- Comment #7 from Nick Clifton ---
Author: nickc
Date: Tue Jan 5 13:20:29 2016
New Revision: 232072
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=232072&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/68770
* ira-costs.c (copy_cost): Initialise the t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69123
--- Comment #5 from H.J. Lu ---
Created attachment 37226
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37226&action=edit
A testcase
./xgcc -B./ -S -O3 -g /tmp/x.ii -fno-rtti -fno-exceptions
never finishes.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62536
vehre at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vehre at gcc dot gnu.org
--- C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67973
--- Comment #15 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
Could the fix be back ported to the gcc5 branch?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69104
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|accepts-invalid |diagnostic
--- Comment #7 from Marek Pol
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67973
--- Comment #16 from Iain Sandoe ---
Created attachment 37227
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37227&action=edit
back-port of Rainer's fix.
I've been using this on my GCC5.3 WIP (it might be a reasonable starting point,
don't
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58583
--- Comment #9 from Nathan Sidwell ---
Author: nathan
Date: Tue Jan 5 14:40:11 2016
New Revision: 232075
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=232075&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
gcc/cp/
PR c++/58583
* pt.c (build_non_dependent
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69124
Matthias Klose changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58616
Bug 58616 depends on bug 58583, which changed state.
Bug 58583 Summary: [c++11] ICE with invalid non-static data member
initialization in template
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58583
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69123
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #6
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58583
Nathan Sidwell changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69124
--- Comment #7 from Matthias Klose ---
> Debian is known to heavily modify their GCC sources.
While Debian applies patches, these are almost all not code-modifying patches,
just the release plus updates from the release branches.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69123
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #37226|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69145
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to David Malcolm from comment #3)
> (In reply to Tobias Burnus from comment #1)
> > Test case (seems as if the file name of the included file matters):
>
> It may be that the threshold for triggeri
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68612
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69145
--- Comment #3 from David Malcolm ---
(In reply to Tobias Burnus from comment #1)
> Test case (seems as if the file name of the included file matters):
It may be that the threshold for triggering the bug is length of token >= 32:
libcpp uses loc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68960
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
Se
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69146
--- Comment #1 from Bill Schmidt ---
Please provide cluster.ii as an attachment. Thanks...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69148
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69146
--- Comment #2 from Bill Schmidt ---
Oh, sorry, you provided it inline. Need my coffee this morning.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69113
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69149
Bug ID: 69149
Summary: Segmentation fault during compile of libre office with
debug
Product: gcc
Version: 5.3.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69124
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69149
--- Comment #1 from Johannes Hauf ---
Created attachment 37229
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37229&action=edit
Compiler output
Compressed compiler output
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69150
Bug ID: 69150
Summary: undocumented dllimport/dllexport attributes in mcore
backend
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pri
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68960
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69149
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69140
--- Comment #7 from Justas L ---
(In reply to Eric Botcazou from comment #5)
> As expected, reverting the patch doesn't change anything on the 5 branch, so
> I'd suggest either filling a bug report for 'git bisect' or double checking
> its result
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69122
--- Comment #3 from David Malcolm ---
Author: dmalcolm
Date: Tue Jan 5 15:54:46 2016
New Revision: 232076
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=232076&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Fix PR c/69122 (-Wmisleading-indentation false positive with empty macr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69148
Andreas Krebbel changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69122
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69113
--- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek ---
Looks like this fixes it...
diff --git a/gcc/cp/decl2.c b/gcc/cp/decl2.c
index 9a07e1e..a7212ca0 100644
--- a/gcc/cp/decl2.c
+++ b/gcc/cp/decl2.c
@@ -1820,7 +1820,8 @@ comdat_linkage (tree decl)
}
}
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68651
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Known to work
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68651
--- Comment #2 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: ktkachov
Date: Tue Jan 5 16:06:06 2016
New Revision: 232077
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=232077&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[combine][v2] Canonicalise (r + r) to (r << 1) to aid reco
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69108
vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |vries at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69148
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
And
union U { int r; float f; };
struct A {
int a;
union U b[64];
};
double foo (double);
void
bar (struct A *z, int x)
{
union U y;
y.f = foo (z->b[x].f);
z->a = y.r ? 4 : y.r;
}
too (to make it C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69148
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |5.4
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66223
--- Comment #7 from Daniel Frey ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #6)
> The advantage of __builtin_unreachable () is that it allows better
> optimizations, at the expense of the invalid code not being so nicely
> reported.
> With -fsani
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69151
Bug ID: 69151
Summary: missing docs for H8/3000 monitor/OS_Task attributes
and related breakage in -mexr/-mno-exr options
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68770
--- Comment #8 from Nick Clifton ---
Patch applied. (Unfortunately I cannot close this BZ...)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68770
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69123
--- Comment #8 from H.J. Lu ---
A small testcase:
[hjl@gnu-mic-2 i386]$ cat /tmp/x.ii
struct xxx_def;
typedef xxx_def *xxx;
union rtxxx
{
const char *rt_str;
xxx rt_xxx;
};
struct xxx_def {
union u {
rtxxx fld[1];
} u;
};
extern x
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69124
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vmakarov at redhat dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69140
--- Comment #8 from Eric Botcazou ---
> Sorry, I indeed made a mistake - r230176 makes compilation fail with a
> different error than the one I get with 5.3 release. However, after
> rerunning git bisect and manually checking these revisions I ca
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69124
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|target |rtl-optimization
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69143
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60465
--- Comment #38 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
Author: law
Date: Tue Jan 5 17:57:05 2016
New Revision: 232080
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=232080&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
[PATCH v2] ia64: don't use dynamic relocations for local symbols
P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60465
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[4.9/5/6 Regression]|[4.9/5 Regression]
|C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69123
--- Comment #9 from H.J. Lu ---
(insn:TI 248 289 246 8 (set (reg:V2DI 21 xmm0 [130])
(mem/c:V2DI (plus:DI (reg/f:DI 7 sp)
(const_int 16 [0x10])) [9 %sfp+-32 S16 A128])) /tmp/x.ii:24
1215 {*movv2di_internal}
(nil))
...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69124
--- Comment #11 from Mikael Pettersson ---
(In reply to ktkachov from comment #9)
> So I did a bisection between 4.9 and 5.
> The offending commit is r217624:
> Author: vmakarov
> Date: Sun Nov 16 05:00:30 2014 +
>
> 2014-11-15 Vladi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1078
--- Comment #10 from sandra at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: sandra
Date: Tue Jan 5 18:04:01 2016
New Revision: 232081
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=232081&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2016-01-05 Sandra Loosemore
PR 1078
gcc/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69123
--- Comment #10 from H.J. Lu ---
This change makes it to compile:
diff --git a/gcc/var-tracking.c b/gcc/var-tracking.c
index 07eea84..43a85b7 100644
--- a/gcc/var-tracking.c
+++ b/gcc/var-tracking.c
@@ -4968,7 +4968,7 @@ dataflow_set_different (
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69140
--- Comment #9 from Justas L ---
Yes, forced stack alignment on x86_64 was introduced after 5.2, in r228728 for
pr66697. Also, I can confirm that adding -fno-omit-frame-pointer allows Wine to
compile normally.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65996
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org
A
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69149
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69140
--- Comment #10 from Eric Botcazou ---
Created attachment 37231
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37231&action=edit
Reduced testcase
To be compiled with -O2 -mincoming-stack-boundary=3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69140
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||uros at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #11
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68009
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66460
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hauf.johannes at gmail dot com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69149
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60465
--- Comment #40 from Mike Frysinger ---
(In reply to Jeffrey A. Law from comment #39)
we should at least do gcc-5. i'm guessing there won't be another 4.9.
1 - 100 of 172 matches
Mail list logo
