[Bug bootstrap/84554] make check: FAIL: tversion: ERROR! The versions of gmp.h (5.0.5) and libgmp (4.3.1) do not match.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84554 --- Comment #3 from matthew.hambley at metoffice dot gov.uk --- > That shouldn't be possible, because by using contrib/download_prerequisites > GCC > will link to a static in-tree libgmp.a and so doesn't need any libgmp.so at > all. That was my

[Bug bootstrap/32497] Crosscomiling native sh3 gcc on a 64-bit host fails

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32497 --- Comment #8 from Valeriy E. Ushakov --- I don't understand. The title mentions sh3, which is not obsolete. It's been 11 (eleven!) years. As far as I know this patch (adjusted to catch up with the changes, but essentially the same) is still

[Bug c/87248] New: Bad code for masked operations involving signed ints

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87248 Bug ID: 87248 Summary: Bad code for masked operations involving signed ints Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Compo

[Bug c++/87241] A hang problem for c++filt

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87241 --- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely --- Yes, that's why I changed the status from UNCONFIRMED to NEW.

[Bug bootstrap/58828] Problem compiling gcc 4.8.2 using gcc 4.4.6

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58828 --- Comment #5 from Daniel Fruzynski --- (In reply to Eric Gallager from comment #4) > (In reply to Daniel Fruzynski from comment #3) > > OK, I found it. I used script symlink-tree (distributed with binutils) to > > create symlinks to binutils in

[Bug c++/87249] New: Undefined reference within a header

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87249 Bug ID: 87249 Summary: Undefined reference within a header Product: gcc Version: 8.2.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++

[Bug c++/87250] New: Internal compiler error with -Os -fsyntax-only

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87250 Bug ID: 87250 Summary: Internal compiler error with -Os -fsyntax-only Product: gcc Version: 8.2.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c+

[Bug fortran/85507] [6/7/8/9 Regression] ICE in gfc_dep_resolver, at fortran/dependency.c:2258

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85507 vehre at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|--

[Bug bootstrap/32497] Crosscomiling native sh3 gcc on a 64-bit host fails

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32497 --- Comment #9 from Oleg Endo --- (In reply to Valeriy E. Ushakov from comment #8) > > It's been 11 (eleven!) years. As far as I know this patch (adjusted to > catch up with the changes, but essentially the same) is still necessary for > gcc 6.

[Bug tree-optimization/87188] Function pointer canonicalization optimized away

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87188 --- Comment #17 from dave.anglin at bell dot net --- The attached patch isn't a good fix but it does work around the problem.

[Bug c++/87249] Undefined reference within a header

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87249 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last reconfirmed|

[Bug bootstrap/58828] Problem compiling gcc 4.8.2 using gcc 4.4.6

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58828 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug fortran/87251] New: warn about unnecessary USE statements

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87251 Bug ID: 87251 Summary: warn about unnecessary USE statements Product: gcc Version: 9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: fortran

[Bug fortran/87251] warn about unnecessary USE statements

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87251 janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill

[Bug bootstrap/32497] Crosscomiling native sh3 gcc on a 64-bit host fails

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32497 --- Comment #10 from Eric Gallager --- (In reply to Valeriy E. Ushakov from comment #8) > I don't understand. The title mentions sh3, which is not obsolete. > Sorry, I misunderstood the sh numbering system when asking that last night (it was l

[Bug fortran/85395] [F03] private clause contained in derived type acquires spurious scope

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85395 janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||rejects-valid

[Bug c++/87152] internal compiler error: in tsubst_copy, at cp/pt.c:15484

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87152 --- Comment #4 from Marek Polacek --- Author: mpolacek Date: Fri Sep 7 14:12:48 2018 New Revision: 264158 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=264158&root=gcc&view=rev Log: PR c++/87152 - range-based for loops with initializer broken in

[Bug c++/87152] internal compiler error: in tsubst_copy, at cp/pt.c:15484

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87152 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/87150] [8/9 Regression] move ctor wrongly chosen in return stmt (derived vs. base)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87150 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|SUSPENDED --- Comment #8 from Marek Pola

[Bug c++/87150] [8/9 Regression] move ctor wrongly chosen in return stmt (derived vs. base)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87150 --- Comment #9 from Stephan Bergmann --- (In reply to Marek Polacek from comment #8) > It appears that the sentiment is that this testcase should actually be > valid Do you have a reference for that? The reason for this not to be valid, present

[Bug c++/87150] [8/9 Regression] move ctor wrongly chosen in return stmt (derived vs. base)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87150 --- Comment #10 from Marek Polacek --- I suspended this in view of .

[Bug bootstrap/32497] Crosscomiling native sh3 gcc on a 64-bit host fails

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32497 Valeriy E. Ushakov changed: What|Removed |Added CC||uwe at netbsd dot org --- Comment #

[Bug bootstrap/32497] Crosscomiling native sh3 gcc on a 64-bit host fails

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32497 --- Comment #12 from Valeriy E. Ushakov --- I've attached updated patch against gcc 6.4.0. If I un-apply that patch to the NetBSD tree with patch -R (i.e. revert the files to their original state as in gcc 6.4.0) I get $ nbmake-landisk insn-emi

[Bug bootstrap/32497] Crosscomiling native sh3 gcc on a 64-bit host fails

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32497 --- Comment #13 from Valeriy E. Ushakov --- The above build was done on a linux/amd64 host. The error happens when NetBSD build cross-compiles native NetBSD/sh3 gcc, i.e. the compiler that will run natively on sh3 as part of the NetBSD distribut

[Bug bootstrap/32497] Crosscomiling native sh3 gcc on a 64-bit host fails

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32497 --- Comment #14 from Valeriy E. Ushakov --- Sorry, I meant comment #6 in the above.

[Bug middle-end/87247] intrinsic acosh violates 2008 Standard rule 13.7.5 line 5

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87247 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||wrong-code Component|libfortran

[Bug rtl-optimization/87238] Redundant Restore of $x0 when memcpy always returns the first argument.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87238 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug fortran/86116] [6/7/8/9 Regression] Ambiguous generic interface not recognised

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86116 --- Comment #6 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: janus Date: Fri Sep 7 17:33:15 2018 New Revision: 264161 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=264161&root=gcc&view=rev Log: 2018-09-07 Janus Weil Backported from trunk

[Bug c/87248] Bad code for masked operations involving signed ints

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87248 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug c/87248] Bad code for masked operations involving signed ints

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87248 --- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek --- /* A & N ? N : 0 is simply A & N if N is a power of two. This is probably obsolete because the first operand should be a truth value (that's why we have the two cases above), but let'

[Bug middle-end/87248] [6/7/8/9 Regression] Bad code for masked operations involving signed ints

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87248 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||wrong-code Component|c

[Bug fortran/86116] [6/7/8/9 Regression] Ambiguous generic interface not recognised

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86116 --- Comment #7 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: janus Date: Fri Sep 7 18:01:23 2018 New Revision: 264162 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=264162&root=gcc&view=rev Log: 2018-09-07 Janus Weil Backported from trunk

[Bug fortran/86116] [6/7/8/9 Regression] Ambiguous generic interface not recognised

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86116 janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|--

[Bug middle-end/87247] intrinsic acosh violates 2008 Standard rule 13.7.5 line 5

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87247 --- Comment #2 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1) > I think there are two issues here, one is the glibc also puts the result in > the wrong quadrant. The other issue is the GCC's constant folding does to

[Bug c++/71446] Incorrect overload resolution when using designated initializers

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71446 Harald van Dijk changed: What|Removed |Added CC||harald at gigawatt dot nl --- Comment

[Bug middle-end/58670] asm goto miscompilation

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58670 Nick Desaulniers changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ndesaulniers at google dot com --- Co

[Bug fortran/53796] I/O INQUIRE of RECL: If not specified in OPEN, the default value should be returned (sequential access)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53796 --- Comment #22 from Janne Blomqvist --- Author: jb Date: Fri Sep 7 18:59:50 2018 New Revision: 264163 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=264163&root=gcc&view=rev Log: Remove unused init_unsigned_integer function. As pointed out by Bernhard

[Bug tree-optimization/87188] Function pointer canonicalization optimized away

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87188 --- Comment #18 from dave.anglin at bell dot net --- On 2018-09-07 8:12 AM, dave.anglin at bell dot net wrote: > The attached patch isn't a good fix but it does work around the problem. This fix is better.  The checks in expr.c and fold-const.c we

[Bug tree-optimization/87188] Function pointer canonicalization optimized away

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87188 --- Comment #19 from dave.anglin at bell dot net --- On 2018-09-07 3:14 PM, dave.anglin at bell dot net wrote: > This fix is better. Oops, wrong patch.

[Bug middle-end/87247] intrinsic acosh violates 2008 Standard rule 13.7.5 line 5

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87247 --- Comment #3 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to kargl from comment #2) > (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1) > > I think there are two issues here, one is the glibc also puts the result in > > the wrong quadrant. The other i

[Bug middle-end/87247] intrinsic acosh violates 2008 Standard rule 13.7.5 line 5

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87247 --- Comment #4 from joseph at codesourcery dot com --- The standard branch cut for acosh (not just a C standard, but as at https://dlmf.nist.gov/4.37 for example) follows from the principles that (a) acosh(conj(x)) = conj(acosh(x)) and (b) comp

[Bug bootstrap/87252] New: gcc-4.4 cross-builds broken, apparently in self-tests

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87252 Bug ID: 87252 Summary: gcc-4.4 cross-builds broken, apparently in self-tests Product: gcc Version: 9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: build Severity: normal Prio

[Bug middle-end/87248] [6/7/8/9 Regression] Bad code for masked operations involving signed ints

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87248 --- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek --- Created attachment 44671 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=44671&action=edit gcc9-pr87248.patch Untested fix.

[Bug bootstrap/87252] gcc-4.4 cross-builds broken, apparently in self-tests

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87252 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2018-08/msg01891.html

[Bug bootstrap/87252] gcc-4.4 cross-builds broken, apparently in self-tests

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87252 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski --- Should have been fixed via https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2018-08/msg01996.html .

[Bug bootstrap/87252] gcc-4.4 cross-builds broken, apparently in self-tests

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87252 --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski --- Maybe related to PR 87134. There might be more of these issues floating in GCC code where GCC 4.4 does not implement the C++11 sematics of initializing.

[Bug bootstrap/87252] gcc-4.4 cross-builds broken, apparently in self-tests

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87252 --- Comment #4 from David Malcolm --- Looks like it's crashing on a virtual function call, within the code I added in r263564. It says "pure virtual method called", but it's calling it on an instance of text_range_label (on the stack), which is

[Bug bootstrap/87252] gcc-4.4 cross-builds broken, apparently in self-tests

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87252 --- Comment #5 from David Malcolm --- Possibly due to lifetime issues: perhaps the on-stack text_range_label's dtor is being called (and thus trashing updating the vtable ptr) before the object gets used. (see e.g. https://tombarta.wordpress.com

[Bug bootstrap/87252] gcc-4.4 cross-builds broken, apparently in self-tests

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87252 --- Comment #6 from David Malcolm --- ...though my understanding is that an automatic local's storage is deallocated at the end of the enclosing code block - presumably that's when the dtor is meant to run, and not before.

[Bug c++/67928] Ambiguous call not diagnosed

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67928 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added CC||dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org,

[Bug c++/53215] Warn if orphaned memory is created by ignoring return value of new

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53215 --- Comment #3 from Eric Gallager --- Not that I really know C++ that well, but maybe the builtin operator new could simply be marked with __attribute__((warn_unused_result)) or whatever the C++ equivalent is? I dunno...

[Bug other/19180] Improve documentation on How to Add New GCC option

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19180 --- Comment #6 from Eric Gallager --- (In reply to Manuel López-Ibáñez from comment #4) > From bug 26168: > > Also, the comment at the top of the automatically-generated options.c file > says it's generated by "opts.sh" rather than by those awk

[Bug libstdc++/78851] Resolve DR 550 in cmath and continue using __builtin_powil() even in C++11

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78851 Eric Gallager changed: What|Removed |Added CC||egallager at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment