https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71824
--- Comment #11 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Wed Feb 1 08:02:50 2017
New Revision: 245081
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=245081&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2017-02-01 Richard Biener
PR tree-optimization/71824
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70578
--- Comment #4 from ishikawa,chiaki ---
I found that the following simplified command line causes ICE while the next
command line where I have removed "-fno-exception" does not cause ICE even
though I still keep -gdwarf-output. Hope this may shed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70578
--- Comment #5 from ishikawa,chiaki ---
I have found that g++-5 can compile this without ICE.
So this is a regression in gcc-6.
The version that worked is:
g++-5 -v
Using built-in specs.
COLLECT_GCC=g++-5
COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/usr/lib/gcc/x86_64
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79309
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79309
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79281
--- Comment #6 from John Paul Adrian Glaubitz ---
On gcc-7, we actually can't build when enabling the Go frontend:
libtool: compile: /<>/build/./gcc/xgcc
-B/<>/build/./gcc/ -B/usr/m68k-linux-gnu/bin/
-B/usr/m68k-linux-gnu/lib/ -isystem /usr/m68
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79309
--- Comment #4 from Eric Botcazou ---
> I think it would be better to do:
Yes, this works for me.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79197
--- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Michael Meissner from comment #8)
> I agree the expander should call gpc_reg_operand and not reg_operand. This
> is due to the fact that on PowerPCs with separate floating point registers,
> SFm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79197
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71824
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||7.0.1
Summary|[6/7 Regressio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79310
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79306
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79315
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
Probably a "regression" since we do this verification. I'll try to reproduce
on x86_64.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79313
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Version|unknown
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79319
Bug ID: 79319
Summary: sizeof returns the wrong size of a union containing
aligned members
Product: gcc
Version: 6.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79279
Aurelien Buhrig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79319
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79310
--- Comment #3 from Marc Glisse ---
We already have infer_nonnull_range_by_attribute ("Return true if OP can be
inferred to be a non-NULL after STMT executes by using attributes") and I
assume that strstr has the nonnull attribute in this example
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79318
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Smaller testcase:
struct A
{
int a;
A () : a(0) {};
&operator int () { return a; };
};
int
bar ()
{
A a;
return a;
}
clang++ indeed reports:
pr79318.C:5:3: error: cannot specify any part of a retu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79319
Erik Hofman changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|CLOSED
--- Comment #2 from Erik Hofman --
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79315
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Status|UNCON
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79319
--- Comment #3 from Marc Glisse ---
It is a bit confusing indeed that vec4_t has sizeof: 16 and _Alignof: 32, one
might expect an invariant that sizeof >= _Alignof... But just a typedef doesn't
increase the size, while stuffing it in a struct/uni
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79315
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|aarch64-linux-gnu |aarch64-linux-gnu,
|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79315
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener ---
The bogus location is on &__builtin_powf in
_224 = __builtin_powf (_38, 1.80942779541015625e+0);
in wsm32d. It gets the location via
#1 0x00ff33a5 in move_stmt_op (tp=0x766b3a90,
wa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79315
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener ---
Will test
Index: gcc/tree-cfg.c
===
--- gcc/tree-cfg.c (revision 245064)
+++ gcc/tree-cfg.c (working copy)
@@ -6636,11 +6636,12 @@ m
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79319
--- Comment #4 from Erik Hofman ---
This was just the shortest snippet of code that showed the situation.
The reason for 32-byte alignment is that I use it with AVX code and wanted the
fastest possible assignment from a float vector.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70578
--- Comment #6 from ishikawa,chiaki ---
(In reply to ishikawa,chiaki from comment #5)
> I have found that g++-5 can compile this without ICE.
> So this is a regression in gcc-6.
>
> The version that worked is:
>
> g++-5 -v
> Using built-in spec
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79319
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79308
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-invalid-code
Status|UN
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69637
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79250
--- Comment #2 from Pekka Jääskeläinen
---
Committed in r245084.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70578
--- Comment #7 from ishikawa,chiaki ---
Created attachment 40643
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=40643&action=edit
preprocessed file that caused gcc-5 to experience the similar ICE.
The uploaded file was created by passing -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79319
--- Comment #6 from Erik Hofman ---
Thanks for the suggestion but after thinking it through some more I came to the
conclusion I made a mistake. 32-byte alignment is only required for AVX when
using 8-float (or 4-double) vectors. Otherwise the co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79311
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79320
Bug ID: 79320
Summary: sqrt of negative number do not return NaN with
i686-w64-mingw32-gcc on pentiumI7/Windows10
Product: gcc
Version: 5.4.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79321
Bug ID: 79321
Summary: -ftree-parallelize-loops miscompiles 400.perlbench
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: wrong-code
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70578
--- Comment #8 from ishikawa,chiaki ---
As for gcc-5 ICE, I observe an important thing after a little experimentation.
This is a shortened command line that causes the ICE.
/usr/bin/gcc-5 -std=gnu99 -o vp9_dsubexp.o -c -DNDEBUG=1 -DTRIMMED=1 \
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79315
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener ---
On x86_64 I see a similar ICE when building 416.gamess
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67326
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70137
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79320
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||i686-w64-mingw32
--- Comment #1 from Ri
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70137
--- Comment #3 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
I can't reproduce it anymore either.
I guess it can be closed then
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67326
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||5.1.0, 7.0
Target Milestone|7.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59859
Bug 59859 depends on bug 70137, which changed state.
Bug 70137 Summary: internal compiler error: in add_phi_arg_for_new_expr, at
graphite-isl-ast-to-gimple.c:2331
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70137
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70137
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78346
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |5.5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78346
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78420
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79113
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79322
Bug ID: 79322
Summary: gcc-6.3.0 inconsistent libstdc++ and libgcc_s link for
libcc1 and libgcj
Product: gcc
Version: 6.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72712
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68664
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19721
Bug 19721 depends on bug 72712, which changed state.
Bug 72712 Summary: [7 Regression] Tenfold compile time regression
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=72712
What|Removed |Added
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78140
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78468
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78604
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79077
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Priority|P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79104
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79141
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79323
Bug ID: 79323
Summary: FAIL: 20_util/duration/literals/range.cc (test for
excess errors)
Product: gcc
Version: 7.0.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79254
--- Comment #11 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Wed Feb 1 11:41:48 2017
New Revision: 245085
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=245085&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/79254 simplify exception-safety in copy assignment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71351
--- Comment #5 from Martin Liška ---
Just our of curiosity, why graphite does a transformation as original and AST
are same:
[scheduler] original ast:
{
for (int c0 = 0; c0 < P_19; c0 += 1) {
S_4(c0);
for (int c1 = 0; c1 <= 2; c1 += 1)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71142
--- Comment #10 from Martin Liška ---
Can't reproduce any of both tests on both x86_64-linux-gnu and aarach64. Is it
still valid?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79323
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71142
--- Comment #11 from ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #10)
> Can't reproduce any of both tests on both x86_64-linux-gnu and aarach64. Is
> it still valid?
I can reproduce the ICE on the original testcase on G
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79195
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Wed Feb 1 12:12:34 2017
New Revision: 245087
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=245087&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/79195 fix make_array type deduction
PR libstdc++/79
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79254
--- Comment #12 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Wed Feb 1 12:12:28 2017
New Revision: 245086
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=245086&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/79254 fix exception-safety of std::string copy assignment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79254
--- Comment #13 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Wed Feb 1 12:18:43 2017
New Revision: 245088
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=245088&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/79254 fix exception-safety of std::string copy assignment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79195
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79254
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79322
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56862
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78975
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |8.0
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakel
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79315
--- Comment #7 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Wed Feb 1 12:47:25 2017
New Revision: 245089
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=245089&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2017-02-01 Richard Biener
PR middle-end/79315
* tre
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78346
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Wed Feb 1 12:57:46 2017
New Revision: 245091
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=245091&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR78346 make handle stashing iterators
PR libstdc++/78346
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78346
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Wed Feb 1 12:57:35 2017
New Revision: 245090
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=245090&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR78346 make handle stashing iterators
PR libstdc++/78346
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=76957
--- Comment #10 from Richard Biener ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Wed Feb 1 12:58:27 2017
New Revision: 245094
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=245094&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2017-02-01 Richard Biener
PR testsuite/76957
* gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78346
--- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Wed Feb 1 12:57:58 2017
New Revision: 245092
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=245092&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR78346 make handle stashing iterators
PR libstdc++/78346
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78346
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=76957
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||xfail
Priority|P4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71351
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59859
Bug 59859 depends on bug 71142, which changed state.
Bug 71142 Summary: [6/7 Regression] ICE: Segmentation fault in ssa_default_def
(graphite)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71142
What|Removed |Ad
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71142
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12245
--- Comment #62 from Richard Biener ---
Main issue is still for GCC:
Kind Nodes Bytes
constants1630852 39140573
integer_cst 1630844
c/c-typeck.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12245
--- Comment #63 from Richard Biener ---
Sth that could pay off with other testcases (nested CONSTRUCTORs) is to
truncate the size of the CONSTRUCTOR_ELTS vec<> to the exact final size after
parsing it
as it will never grow again and we over-alloc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79317
--- Comment #1 from ggoeckel at presby dot edu ---
My error. Sorry. Double precision entered with this assignment.
lntwo=6.9314718055994530941723212145817446e-01
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79281
--- Comment #7 from Ian Lance Taylor ---
It sounds like you have a patch for GCC 6. If you send it in I can apply it.
The error you show must be from `make -j`, as compiling a file in libgfortran
would not invoke go1. What is the actual failur
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79320
--- Comment #2 from Daniel WEIL ---
OK. I log the issue on mingw bugs : https://sourceforge.net/p/mingw/bugs/2337/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79321
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79321
--- Comment #2 from Martin Liška ---
And running with OMP_NUM_LIMIT=1 works fine.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79272
--- Comment #6 from Martin Liška ---
Author: marxin
Date: Wed Feb 1 14:04:38 2017
New Revision: 245095
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=245095&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Add dg-require-alias to a ICF test (PR testsuite/79272).
2017-02-01 Mart
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79272
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79281
--- Comment #8 from James Clarke ---
Created attachment 40645
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=40645&action=edit
Proposed fix
I believe this patch is what Adrian did; Adrian, can you please confirm?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79281
John Paul Adrian Glaubitz changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||glaubitz at physik dot
fu-be
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69866
--- Comment #8 from Martin Liška ---
Is affected just the arm-none-eabi target, or are any others?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79307
--- Comment #4 from Szikra ---
> This is bug 44974.
>
> > Possible duplicate of bug #44859 or bug #51270.
>
> Looks more like bug 49974 to me.
>
> *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 44974 ***
Hi you are right, my first example
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79300
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79321
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79321
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|NEW
Resolution|FIXED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79321
--- Comment #4 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Wed, 1 Feb 2017, marxin at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79321
>
> Martin Liška changed:
>
>What|Removed |Added
>
1 - 100 of 181 matches
Mail list logo
