https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99809
Bug ID: 99809
Summary: ICE: sorry, unimplemented: unexpected AST of kind
nontype_argument_pack
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99807
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99793
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Assignee|unassigned at gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99802
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99808
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-03-29
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99810
Bug ID: 99810
Summary: Wrong const evaluation of 64-bit division
Product: gcc
Version: 10.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99807
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |rguenth at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99811
Bug ID: 99811
Summary: ICE: tree check: accessed elt 2 of 'tree_vec' with 1
elts in tsubst_pack_expansion, at cp/pt.c:13002
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99810
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99810
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
mdreorg turns
(insn 5 2 18 2 (set (reg:DI 2 r2)
(const_int -62135769600 [0xfff1886b6600])) "t.c":2:5 251
{*arm_movdi}
(nil))
into
(insn 5 2 18 (set (reg:DI 2 r2)
(mem:DI (label_re
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99810
--- Comment #3 from gcc at cookiesoft dot de ---
I actually haven't, but yes, you're right that it will print out the correct
value.
I'm somewhat sorry for the noise.
Is there a reason, e.g. performance, that the .word is "wrong"?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99811
--- Comment #1 from 康桓瑋 ---
same form with the different error message:
https://godbolt.org/z/hE9n6eEMT
#include
template
auto f(Ts...) {
return [] auto> {};
}
int main() {
f(0).template operator()<0>();
}
:9:30: internal compiler err
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99800
康桓瑋 changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|ice-on-invalid-code |ice-on-valid-code
--- Comment #1 from 康桓瑋 ---
Thi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99810
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99807
--- Comment #3 from Richard Biener ---
Just to say we currently require a ("random") SLP_TREE_REPRESENTATIVE even on
VEC_PERM_EXPR SLP nodes. With the testcase the choosen one is no longer
explicitely referenced and thus it does not get marked b
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99810
--- Comment #5 from gcc at cookiesoft dot de ---
Alright. Then again, sorry for the noise. I was hunting down a bug and thought
I found it with this one... so I have to search further.
Thank you everyone!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99807
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #3)
> Just to say we currently require a ("random") SLP_TREE_REPRESENTATIVE even on
> VEC_PERM_EXPR SLP nodes. With the testcase the choosen one is no longer
> expli
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99555
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Tobias Burnus :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:d579e2e76f9469e1b386d693af57c5c4f0ede410
commit r11-7886-gd579e2e76f9469e1b386d693af57c5c4f0ede410
Author: Tobias Burnus
Date: Mo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99808
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Started with r7-8376-g726e7a70b911f4676de4a97b19e042552ceedd17
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99808
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99812
Bug ID: 99812
Summary: [11 regression] Many libphobos.druntime_shared etc.
tests FAIL
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99812
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |11.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99808
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
The bug is clearly on the aarch64 backend side,
(insn 7 6 8 (set (reg/v:V2DF 73 [ arg2 ])
(vec_concat:V2DF (reg:DF 75)
(const_int 0 [0]))) "pr99808.c":9 -1
(nil))
(insn 8 7 0 (set (r
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99813
Bug ID: 99813
Summary: SVE: Invalid assembly at -O3 (multiplier out of range
in incb instruction)
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: norma
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99813
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||10.2.1
Summary|S
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99766
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99814
Bug ID: 99814
Summary: regexec fails with -fsanitize=address
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: sanitizer
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99651
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Tobias Burnus
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:f340327d9b3d9f815b45683b739f2321545157cf
commit r10-9552-gf340327d9b3d9f815b45683b739f2321545157cf
Author: Tobias Burnus
D
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99751
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99808
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99808
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
CC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99037
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||asolokha at gmx dot com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97836
--- Comment #8 from Jan Hubicka ---
indeed, I think for gcc11 we want to make return mark value as used and for
next stage1 we want to design EAF flags bit more carefully...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99037
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99037
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
And my patch in the other PR was incorrect, should have just used CONST0_RTX
(mode); always.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99602
--- Comment #36 from Jürgen Reuter ---
I can confirm that the push by Paul, 297363774e6a5dca2f46a85ab086f1d9e59431ac,
does fix all compilations and tests in our code and test suite.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99777
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:25e515d2199d555848dfba01fd5364df94096496
commit r11-7887-g25e515d2199d555848dfba01fd5364df94096496
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date: Mo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99777
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99037
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Kyrylo Tkachov :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:37d9074e12082132ae62c12fbe958c697f638c0a
commit r11-7888-g37d9074e12082132ae62c12fbe958c697f638c0a
Author: Kyrylo Tkachov
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99808
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Kyrylo Tkachov :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:37d9074e12082132ae62c12fbe958c697f638c0a
commit r11-7888-g37d9074e12082132ae62c12fbe958c697f638c0a
Author: Kyrylo Tkachov
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99815
Bug ID: 99815
Summary: ICE: in placeholder_type_constraint_dependent_p, at
cp/pt.c:28193
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99751
--- Comment #8 from Jan Hubicka ---
So we wrongly identify nodirectescape in store_to_c this is due to early exit
in analyze_call that does not account for const call possibly returning its
parameter. (An early confusion in EAF tracking logic bef
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99807
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:8cf2812cfceaf464dff99651b2d911d6e12b52b7
commit r11-7889-g8cf2812cfceaf464dff99651b2d911d6e12b52b7
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99807
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98642
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93711
Bug 93711 depends on bug 98642, which changed state.
Bug 98642 Summary: [10 Regression] wrong "use of deleted function" error
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98642
What|Removed |Added
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90254
Bug 90254 depends on bug 98642, which changed state.
Bug 98642 Summary: [10 Regression] wrong "use of deleted function" error
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98642
What|Removed |Added
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99216
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Alex Coplan :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e4005cf8717abe8c949f840c707e02e6c394c2e7
commit r11-7890-ge4005cf8717abe8c949f840c707e02e6c394c2e7
Author: Alex Coplan
Date: Mon Ma
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99216
--- Comment #8 from Alex Coplan ---
Fixed on trunk. Needs backporting to GCC 10 together with bump to
lto-streamer.h:LTO_minor_version.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99751
--- Comment #9 from Jan Hubicka ---
OK, so actually there is logic to handle return values (even for consts) but it
has wrong if. I am testing the attached fix.
diff --git a/gcc/ipa-modref.c b/gcc/ipa-modref.c
index 7aaf53be8f4..5f33bb5b410 100
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96879
rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Stat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97269
--- Comment #5 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
---
*** Bug 96879 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99790
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99062
--- Comment #8 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Richard Biener
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:9d020d111fbeae228b20d75a8c832b214e561ab3
commit r10-9553-g9d020d111fbeae228b20d75a8c832b214e561ab3
Author: Marek Polacek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99318
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Richard Biener
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:9879b82c77b0c65e39607a0a2d0891ebc75c5995
commit r10-9554-g9879b82c77b0c65e39607a0a2d0891ebc75c5995
Author: Marek Polacek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99318
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99062
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99790
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Note, static vars are unaffected by this, because c_parse_final_cleanups calls
lower_var_init on them and that expands the PTRMEM_CSTs in there.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99309
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
In particular, we have:
step.val = 610334368;
and
_1 = m.val;
_2 = __builtin_constant_p (_1);
before inline, and inline assumes that this __builtin_constant_p will evaluate
to true. It will, but only i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99740
--- Comment #5 from Paul A. Voytas ---
I understand random_number() is much better--which is great and I'll use it
going forward. I was just trying to not have to recode a lot in cases where I
used rand() because it was good enough. I certainly w
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93660
Christophe Lyon changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||clyon at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93660
--- Comment #8 from Tobias Burnus ---
(In reply to Christophe Lyon from comment #7)
> Excess errors:
> /gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/gomp/declare-simd-coarray-lib.f90:8:18: Warning:
> GCC does not currently support mixed size types for 'simd' functi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93660
--- Comment #9 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:afa8c67eb95f669a9bd8e356ffa073418bb269cb
commit r11-7892-gafa8c67eb95f669a9bd8e356ffa073418bb269cb
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date: Mo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99805
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
I cannot reproduce this with upstream GCC. This looks like a bug in
devtoolset-10, so I'll report it to Red Hat's bugzilla instead.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99816
Bug ID: 99816
Summary: fortran do loop line table issue
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99816
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-debug
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99726
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99726
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek ---
And -flive-patching=inline-clone -mavx512f -O2 -floop-nest-optimize
-ftree-loop-vectorize -ftrapv -m32
is sufficient to trigger it.
I'm afraid I'm lost in what exactly the code wants to do.
dr_a.dr:
#(Data Re
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99122
--- Comment #28 from Jakub Jelinek ---
So fixed for GCC 11 now?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99122
--- Comment #29 from Martin Jambor ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #28)
> So fixed for GCC 11 now?
Yes, it should be fixed in GCC 11.
We talked about backporting the patches to GCC 10 with Richi on IRC today and
decided to wait for
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96380
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
Keywo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99802
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96380
--- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #2)
> extern const int a, b;
> enum struct c;
> template
> enum struct c : union enum struct c { e = b, f = a };
> enum class c {};
>
> ICEs even without -fpermissiv
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97252
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Alex Coplan
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:f14adc64c1be6e6a07689ef87c65fc87cc24902f
commit r10-9555-gf14adc64c1be6e6a07689ef87c65fc87cc24902f
Author: Alex Coplan
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97252
Alex Coplan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Summary|[10 Regression] a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43361
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2010-03-14 15:45:50 |2021-3-29
--- Comment #14 from Martin Seb
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99809
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99809
--- Comment #2 from 康桓瑋 ---
I think this is not a valid code even if clang accepts it, since the parameter
packs args are not expanded.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99802
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99802
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[11 regression] Assignment |[11 regression] assignment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99806
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |mpolacek at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99806
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60488
--- Comment #8 from Martin Sebor ---
You're right, the test cases aren't equivalent, or meant to be. What I want to
highlight is that in the test case in comment #6, in g() and other similar ones
like it the warning is most likely going to be a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99803
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |9.4
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99815
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-03-29
Priority|P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99751
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99447
--- Comment #15 from Jan Hubicka ---
I also tried to reproduce this locally w/o luck.
Looking at the backtrace in detail, there is no DEF_STMT involved. It walks
from dwarf dies, to RTL constant pool address that points to tree which has
abstra
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99654
--- Comment #4 from Frank Ch. Eigler ---
A quick diff between the two -fverbose-asm dumps confirms that the generated
object code is identical with or without the -gno-as-locview-support, but the
DW_AT_entry_pc differs.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99751
--- Comment #11 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jan Hubicka :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:7b6ca93b2d57ead352cd5cc3e10be4c33dda674b
commit r11-7895-g7b6ca93b2d57ead352cd5cc3e10be4c33dda674b
Author: Jan Hubicka
Date: Mon M
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99817
Bug ID: 99817
Summary: [10/11 Regression] ICE in create_function_arglist, at
fortran/trans-decl.c:2838 (etc.)
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Sev
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99817
G. Steinmetz changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
--- Comment #1 from G.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99818
Bug ID: 99818
Summary: [10/11 Regression] ICE in gfc_get_tree_for_caf_expr,
at fortran/trans-expr.c:2186
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99819
Bug ID: 99819
Summary: [9/10/11 Regression] ICE in gfc_defer_symbol_init, at
fortran/trans-decl.c:841
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: n
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61112
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Martin Sebor :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:77093a75ca4f3a0d6d9ca77ca8905b77695a2599
commit r11-7896-g77093a75ca4f3a0d6d9ca77ca8905b77695a2599
Author: Martin Sebor
Date: Mon
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95592
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:fa9c46939f9a5c5eb90338b80b213ec1e3579df7
commit r10-9567-gfa9c46939f9a5c5eb90338b80b213ec1e3579df7
Author: Jonathan Wakel
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82584
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:56b810af1bdf106b132dcf1f1a01573af6a3468b
commit r10-9572-g56b810af1bdf106b132dcf1f1a01573af6a3468b
Author: Jonathan Wakel
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98226
--- Comment #14 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:d7216ea6c0cd6c4fef06e9501bd630c3161b14fd
commit r10-9576-gd7216ea6c0cd6c4fef06e9501bd630c3161b14fd
Author: Jonathan Wake
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93151
--- Comment #8 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:f1b7f082d09a5ebcf7632b1fd446551f480dc9a8
commit r10-9577-gf1b7f082d09a5ebcf7632b1fd446551f480dc9a8
Author: Jonathan Wakel
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98319
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:564e5b6ce002608f461d4275c126d8179ef806c6
commit r10-9578-g564e5b6ce002608f461d4275c126d8179ef806c6
Author: Jonathan Wakel
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1
--- Comment #17 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:8455158044503a25ebb044428be2ddc83d2b0473
commit r10-9582-g8455158044503a25ebb044428be2ddc83d2b0473
Author: Jonathan Wake
1 - 100 of 165 matches
Mail list logo
