https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104800
--- Comment #14 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Wed, 9 Mar 2022, muecker at gwdg dot de wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104800
>
> --- Comment #12 from Martin Uecker ---
> (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104839
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:7ca24ae5701769fccabf8cca4cad6987cb2187c6
commit r12-7556-g7ca24ae5701769fccabf8cca4cad6987cb2187c6
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date: W
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104711
--- Comment #9 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:d76511138dc816ef66fd16f71531f48c37dac3b4
commit r12-7557-gd76511138dc816ef66fd16f71531f48c37dac3b4
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date: W
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104839
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104836
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104429
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104839
--- Comment #8 from Victor Stinner ---
> Fixed.
Thank you! That was quick!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104800
--- Comment #15 from Martin Uecker ---
(In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #13)
> On Wed, 9 Mar 2022, muecker at gwdg dot de wrote:
>
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104800
> >
> > --- Comment #11 from Martin Uecker -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104800
--- Comment #16 from Martin Uecker ---
(In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #14)
> On Wed, 9 Mar 2022, muecker at gwdg dot de wrote:
>
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104800
> >
> > --- Comment #12 from Martin Uecker -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104846
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104734
--- Comment #2 from Albert Astals Cid ---
Created attachment 52589
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=52589&action=edit
preprocessed source with -isystem
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104734
--- Comment #3 from Albert Astals Cid ---
Created attachment 52590
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=52590&action=edit
preprocessed source with -I
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104850
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2022-03-09
Keywords|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104734
--- Comment #4 from Albert Astals Cid ---
Added both the pre-processed source with both -isystem and -I
They seem mostly the same except some ¿annotations/comments?
Had to compress them with xz since otherwise they were too big to attach, hope
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104851
--- Comment #1 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Xi Ruoyao :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:1c7b110e1e44da0c93d0d011f5109c5d09bf4399
commit r12-7559-g1c7b110e1e44da0c93d0d011f5109c5d09bf4399
Author: Xi Ruoyao
Date: Wed Mar 9
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104851
Xi Ruoyao changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63426
Bug 63426 depends on bug 104851, which changed state.
Bug 104851 Summary: off-by-one out-of-bound access in
supports_vec_convert_optab_p, at optabs-query.cc:725
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104851
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104850
--- Comment #2 from Amir Kirsh ---
// adding the required include to the example
#include // for nullptr_t
template
struct uptr {
uptr(nullptr_t) {}
~uptr() {
delete (new T);
}
};
class A
{
public:
A();
~A();
private:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104684
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |9.5
Priority|P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104835
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104814
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104790
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Priority|P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104844
--- Comment #2 from Tobias Burnus ---
Mentioned patch was committed as
r12-7558-ga5c9b7c4f95ef77b83da82241cabdf80d8b1cad5
Thus, when this PR is fixed, please uncomment the respective lines in
gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/sizeof_6.f90
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104845
--- Comment #2 from Tobias Burnus ---
Mentioned patch was committed as
r12-7558-ga5c9b7c4f95ef77b83da82241cabdf80d8b1cad5
Thus, when this PR is fixed, please uncomment the respective lines in
gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/sizeof_6.f90
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104789
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic,
|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104786
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104759
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||testsuite-fail
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104749
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||documentation
--- Comment #7 from Rich
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104538
Iain Buclaw changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104835
Iain Buclaw changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||syq at debian dot org
--- Comment #1 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104759
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[12 Regression] |[11/12 Regression]
|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102664
--- Comment #28 from Richard Earnshaw ---
I think the 'echo -n' problem can be solved by changing the one instance of
that operation (in ask()) to
printf "%s" "$question [$default]? "
But I don't have the machines that are problematic to test
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102664
--- Comment #29 from Richard Earnshaw ---
Suggested patch:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2022-March/591455.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104702
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #2)
> I think the problem in this case are primarily the warning-control.cc
> changes.
> In GCC 11, build_vec_init did at the end:
> /* Now make the result have the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104702
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener ---
Btw, we could add verification for that in verify_expr_location_1 (either bit
or spec but not both).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104669
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104666
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104656
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104603
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
Priority
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104541
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104492
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Martin Sebor from comment #5)
> Setting aside the question of warning about inequality expressions involving
> invalid pointers, it seems that if the annotation 'candidates ={v}
> {CLOBBER(eol)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104492
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104475
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
--- Comment #7 fro
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104436
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104284
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104242
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104228
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[9/10/11/12 Regression] ICE |[9/10/11 Regression] ICE in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104209
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104120
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104065
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103724
--- Comment #6 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Frank Heckenbach from comment #5)
> (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #4)
> > One thing we could do is annotate struct loop * with the (high level)
> > optimizations we've applied so tha
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104786
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:ba3ff5e35144e2afff4ccef4ccaba9870afb
commit r12-7560-gba3ff5e35144e2afff4ccef4ccaba9870afb
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104759
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Richard Biener :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:4470e813b0b46d2e579b9e3d69a41a7192709c50
commit r12-7561-g4470e813b0b46d2e579b9e3d69a41a7192709c50
Author: Richard Biener
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104786
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||12.0
Summary|[9/10/11/12 Re
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104759
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Richard Biener
:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e170b2362ab96967e727bbcdf59e964c94c29db8
commit r11-9645-ge170b2362ab96967e727bbcdf59e964c94c29db8
Author: Richard Biener
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104759
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65396
--- Comment #10 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Patrick Palka :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:fe548eb8436f3906e6a3c6e3e8707d24e60ec0fa
commit r12-7562-gfe548eb8436f3906e6a3c6e3e8707d24e60ec0fa
Author: Patrick Palka
Date: W
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87820
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Patrick Palka :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e32869a17b788bee9ca782b174a546b1db17b5ea
commit r12-7563-ge32869a17b788bee9ca782b174a546b1db17b5ea
Author: Patrick Palka
Date: We
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102137
--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Patrick Palka :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e32869a17b788bee9ca782b174a546b1db17b5ea
commit r12-7563-ge32869a17b788bee9ca782b174a546b1db17b5ea
Author: Patrick Palka
Date: W
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104823
--- Comment #4 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Patrick Palka :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:ec0f53a3a542e762f8fc8c22b9d345f922be5867
commit r12-7564-gec0f53a3a542e762f8fc8c22b9d345f922be5867
Author: Patrick Palka
Date: W
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65396
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104702
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #4)
> (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #2)
> > I think the problem in this case are primarily the warning-control.cc
> > changes.
> > In GCC 11, build_vec_init
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50370
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103547
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103528
--- Comment #10 from Richard Biener ---
Fixed?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102137
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87820
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Assignee|unassigned at g
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104823
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102664
--- Comment #30 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Solaris /bin/echo doesn't understand -n
jwakely@gcc-solaris11:~/src/gcc$ ./contrib/gcc-git-customization.sh
-n Your name [Jonathan Wakely]?
-n Your email address (for git commits) [jwak...@redhat.co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102664
--- Comment #31 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #30)
> I'd have done printf "%s [%s]?" "$question" "$default" instead, but they're
> equivalent. Given that I've tested it and you're a global maintainer, I said
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103483
--- Comment #22 from Richard Biener ---
There isn't going to be a good solution that makes all folks happy - we'd
either have false negatives or false positives. It is true that we're
accumulating more and more cases where the user gets the imp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103309
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102664
--- Comment #32 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #30)
> I'd have done printf "%s [%s]?" "$question" "$default" instead, but they're
> equivalent.
Oops, equivalent except for the missing space after the question
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103196
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||testsuite-fail
--- Comment #4 from Ric
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104854
Bug ID: 104854
Summary: [11 Regression] -Wstringop-overread should not warn
for strnlen and strndup
Product: gcc
Version: 11.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104781
--- Comment #9 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:caa6c33c5d5223c50657b08e73177e8d54ceee51
commit r12-7565-gcaa6c33c5d5223c50657b08e73177e8d54ceee51
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date: W
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103039
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2022-03-09
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96780
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #10
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96780
--- Comment #11 from Jason Merrill ---
I'm surprised that adding the "artificial" attribute didn't work; I thought the
main point of that attribute was to automatically skip the function in the
debugger/profiler. I guess that never got implement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104838
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|UNCONFIRME
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104781
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104781
--- Comment #11 from Jakub Jelinek ---
I believe this should now be fixed, Rainer, can you please confirm?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104854
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[11 Regression] |[11/12 Regression]
|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104765
Jun Zhang changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jun at junz dot org
--- Comment #5 from Jun
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103528
--- Comment #11 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #10 from Richard Biener ---
> Fixed?
Not completely. I'd argue we should do two things:
* Document that older GCC versions need to be built with
--enable-libphobos (
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103724
--- Comment #7 from Frank Heckenbach ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #6)
> (In reply to Frank Heckenbach from comment #5)
> > (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #4)
> > > One thing we could do is annotate struct loop * with th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96780
--- Comment #12 from Patrick Palka ---
I should mention I noticed a significant reduction in compile time, memory
usage and unstripped object file size in some cases with the proposed patch at
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2022-March/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104854
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dmalcolm at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104855
Bug ID: 104855
Summary: -Wclass-memaccess is too broad with valid code
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104846
--- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek ---
(In reply to Marek Polacek from comment #1)
> Confirmed. Started with r10-2475-g777e426772f80c. It would be trivial to
> bring back the grokmethod hunk to fix this ICE, but we should be more
> helpful and
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96329
Roger Sayle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Target Milestone|11.3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96437
Roger Sayle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96440
Roger Sayle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104856
Bug ID: 104856
Summary: Build gcc with a target not containing '-gnu' gets
added to gnat target
Product: gcc
Version: 11.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: norm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104854
--- Comment #2 from Siddhesh Poyarekar ---
(In reply to David Malcolm from comment #1)
> Compiler Explorer link for the above (with -fanalyzer -Wall
> -Wstringop-overread -O2; -O2 seems to be needed to trigger it):
Ah yes, sorry, I pasted an ol
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104732
Roger Sayle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103460
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104846
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104813
--- Comment #4 from Martin Jambor ---
I have proposed a patch on the mailing list:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2022-March/591423.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104856
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
CC|
1 - 100 of 155 matches
Mail list logo