--- Comment #16 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-03-28
00:49 ---
Subject: Re: raised STORAGE_ERROR : stack overflow or erroneous memory access
> Dave, does the problem still exist on the 4.2 branch for the PA? I'm
> now seeing it (same backtrace) on a
--- Comment #31 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-03-28
00:58 ---
Subject: Re: Bootstrap comparison error at revision 122821
> /* If we have a RSHIFT_EXPR with a possibly negative shift
> count or an anti-range shift count drop to VR_V
--- Comment #5 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-03-30
00:32 ---
Subject: Re: make[3]: *** [s-gtype] Segmentation fault (core dumped)
> This has been fixed for me with this patch:
>
> 2007-03-29 Zack Weinberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>
--- Comment #42 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-03-31
01:17 ---
Subject: Re: Bootstrap comparison error at revision 122821
+ /* We know that the range of input values covers the entire
+shift space. Reduce to canonical [0,width-1
--- Comment #44 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-03-31
15:10 ---
Subject: Re: Bootstrap comparison error at revision 122821
> Wouldn't it be slightly better to just call range_includes_zero_p (&vr1)
> and return at this point?
Forget that, I didn
--- Comment #46 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-03-31
15:38 ---
Subject: Re: Bootstrap comparison error at revision 122821
> --- Comment #45 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-31 15:13
> ---
> doh, me neither.
I just started a build
--- Comment #3 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-04-01
21:36 ---
Subject: Re: FAIL: 22_locale/time_get/get_date/wchar_t/4.cc execution test
> Dave, unfortunately all the other linux targets are fine, therefore we have
> very big troubles figuring out what is hap
--- Comment #6 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-04-02
00:16 ---
Subject: Re: FAIL: 22_locale/time_get/get_date/wchar_t/4.cc execution test
> (In reply to comment #4)
> > I would suggest checking the contents of __format when _M_extract_via_format
> >
--- Comment #10 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-04-02
03:36 ---
Subject: Re: FAIL: 22_locale/time_get/get_date/wchar_t/4.cc execution test
> --- Comment #8 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2007-04-02 00:53 ---
> One last remark: when something having to d
--- Comment #2 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-04-06
17:53 ---
Subject: Re: [4.3 Regression] ld: Invalid symbol type for plabel
(.libs/debug_list.o, __gxx_personality_v0).
> I am seeing this on my HPPA build as well. David sent me a patch for it
> off-list an
--- Comment #4 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-04-06
22:59 ---
Subject: Re: 100's of new libgomp fails
> Perhaps hppa64 needs the same change to libgomp.exp as in
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-03/msg01497.html ?
I don't think this is nec
--- Comment #4 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-04-06
23:44 ---
Subject: Re: [4.3 Regression] ld: Invalid symbol type for plabel
(.libs/debug_list.o, __gxx_personality_v0).
> That would emit the reference only in situations where we're actually
> going
--- Comment #1 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-04-07
01:35 ---
Subject: Re: New: FAIL: gcc.dg/Warray-bounds.c (internal compiler error)
The tests have been failing since they were added last January.
Dave
--- Comment #2 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc
--- Comment #3 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-04-07
03:37 ---
Subject: Re: FAIL: gcc.dg/Warray-bounds.c (internal compiler error)
The ICE is caused by the presence of this insn:
(insn 124 118 128 2 (set (mem/s:SI (plus:SI (reg/f:SI 30 %r30
--- Comment #4 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-04-07
04:08 ---
Subject: Re: FAIL: gcc.dg/Warray-bounds.c (internal compiler error)
> ;; c.c[11] = 0
Ok, so out-of-bounds array writes in user code can cause the compiler to ICE.
Dave
--
http://gcc.gnu.
--- Comment #8 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-04-07
18:01 ---
Subject: Re: FAIL: gcc.dg/Warray-bounds.c (internal compiler error)
> This is just like PR 12535 where DSE is trying to remove part of the
> prologue/epilogue also.
Looks similar. Particularl
--- Comment #12 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-04-22
17:47 ---
Subject: Re: FAIL: 22_locale/time_get/get_date/wchar_t/4.cc execution test
> --- Comment #11 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2007-04-02 10:32 ---
> Ok, therefore we cannot consider anymo
--- Comment #14 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-04-22
18:17 ---
Subject: Re: FAIL: 22_locale/time_get/get_date/wchar_t/4.cc execution test
> --- Comment #13 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2007-04-22 17:50 ---
> And you are volunteering to fix the tes
--- Comment #2 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-04-22
23:42 ---
Subject: Re: config-int.h:327:1: error: "INT8_MIN" redefined
I'm testing the attached fix.
Dave
--- Comment #3 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-04-22
23:42 ---
--- Comment #1 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-04-22
23:46 ---
Subject: Re: New: TRUE or FALSE defined
I'm testing the attached fix. platform.h needs to be included before
javaprims.h. platform.h includes gcj/cni.h.
Dave
--- Comment #2 from dave at hi
--- Comment #5 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-04-25
00:59 ---
Subject: Re: config-int.h:327:1: error: "INT8_MIN" redefined
> This patch looks ok -- a bit messy, but not overly so for configury code ;).
> Let me know if it works for you, I will push
--- Comment #1 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-07-14
20:00 ---
Subject: Re: New: __builtin_eh_return broken by dataflow merge
Attached is preprocessed source for unwind-dw2.c on hppa-unknown-linux-gnu.
Dave
--- Comment #2 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc
--- Comment #4 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-07-15
00:27 ---
Subject: Re: [4.3 Regression] __builtin_eh_return broken by dataflow merge
I'm testing making the MEM volatile.
Dave
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32769
--- Comment #9 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-07-16
16:16 ---
Subject: Re: jc1: out of memory allocating 4072 bytes after a total of
805021000 bytes
> Hi guys, can you check whether the 32723 fix that was just checked in
> fixes this?
Doesn't seem to be
--- Comment #11 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-07-17
01:06 ---
Subject: Re: jc1: out of memory allocating 4072 bytes after a total of
805021000 bytes
> Hi guys, can you check whether the 32723 fix that was just checked in
> fixes this?
Still same problem wi
--- Comment #1 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-07-19
23:49 ---
Subject: Re: New: Bootstrap comparison error -- VUSES info changed
For reference, I attached the difference in omega.o between stage
2 and 3.
--- Comment #2 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot
--- Comment #2 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-07-21
23:28 ---
Subject: Re: FAIL: g++.dg/opt/pr24665.C
> Looking at gcc-testresults for i686-pc-linux-gnu, revision 126573 works while
> 126587 fails.
126595 introduced a bootstrap failure on hppa64-hp-hpux11.
--- Comment #3 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-07-21
23:54 ---
Subject: Re: FAIL: g++.dg/opt/pr24665.C
> > Looking at gcc-testresults for i686-pc-linux-gnu, revision 126573 works
> > while
> > 126587 fails.
>
> 126595 introduced a bootst
--- Comment #2 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-07-24
15:40 ---
Subject: Re: FAIL: 23_containers/bitset/cons/16020.cc execution test
> I think there is no reason to categorize as libstdc++: almost nothing changed
> in the library in that timespan (and defi
--- Comment #11 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-07-24
16:25 ---
Subject: Re: Exception handling not thread-safe on AIX5.x and HP-UX
> It doesn't seem to fail using g++ 4.2. Fix or fluke?
There were some changes to config/pa/hpux-unwind.h in 2006 that
--- Comment #6 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-07-24
19:30 ---
Subject: Re: FAIL: 23_containers/bitset/cons/16020.cc execution test
> 0x00010318 and 0x0001031c are totally bogus. Changing this
> to a middle-end bug.
Here is preprocessed source.
--- Comment #13 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-07-25
21:53 ---
Subject: Re: FAIL: 23_containers/bitset/cons/16020.cc execution test
> Can you attach the dump of -fdump-rtl-expand-details ?
Attached.
Dave
--- Comment #14 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot
--- Comment #8 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-07-25
21:31 ---
Subject: Re: FAIL: 23_containers/bitset/cons/16020.cc execution test
The appears to be a problem with the sched passes. If I compile with
-fno-schedule-insns and -fno-schedule-insns2, the test doesn&#
--- Comment #17 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-07-25
22:07 ---
Subject: Re: FAIL: 23_containers/bitset/cons/16020.cc execution test
> So the aliasing set of bitset<5> is 88 and the store for
> b.D.57473.D.57333._M_w
> is done in aliasing set 10.
--- Comment #18 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-07-25
23:34 ---
Subject: Re: FAIL: 23_containers/bitset/cons/16020.cc execution test
> > So the aliasing set of bitset<5> is 88 and the store for
> > b.D.57473.D.57333._M_w
> > is done in alias
--- Comment #21 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-07-31
15:30 ---
Subject: Re: FAIL: 23_containers/bitset/cons/16020.cc execution test
> --- Comment #20 from hjl at lucon dot org 2007-07-30 20:41 ---
> Is this related to PR32921? Can you try the pa
--- Comment #3 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-08-08
18:11 ---
Subject: Re: Segmentation fault bootstrapping on HP-UX 11.11
> --- Comment #2 from pda at freeshell dot org 2007-08-08 17:10 ---
> I tried configuring for HP ld as you suggested, but that
--- Comment #1 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-08-09
17:57 ---
Subject: Re: New: Unsatisfied symbol "lroundl" in file libgfortran.sl
The symbol is from misc_specifics.o.
Dave
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33038
--- Comment #3 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-08-09
18:41 ---
Subject: Re: New: Unsatisfied symbol "lroundl" in file libgfortran.sl
> The symbol is from misc_specifics.o.
It looks like lroundl there is an implementation using roundl. There
is an impl
--- Comment #5 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-08-09
23:30 ---
Subject: Re: FAIL: gfortran.dg/integer_exponentiation_2.f90 at -O1 and above
> Any results? I cannot reproduce this on hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.31 (neither the
> original bug nor your testcase that
--- Comment #4 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-08-10
00:41 ---
Subject: Re: FAIL: gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/nan_inf_fmt.f90 execution
> Still can't reproduce this on hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.31. I'm starting to think
> that
> printf might be brok
--- Comment #6 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-08-10
04:42 ---
Subject: Re: FAIL: gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/nan_inf_fmt.f90 execution
> write_float uses isfinite (n) and isnan (n) to determine if "Infinite" or
> "NaN"
> is e
--- Comment #7 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-08-11
13:05 ---
Subject: Re: FAIL: gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/nan_inf_fmt.f90 execution
> write_float uses isfinite (n) and isnan (n) to determine if "Infinite" or
> "NaN"
> is e
--- Comment #7 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-08-19
01:11 ---
Subject: Re: ICE in emit_move_insn and expand_call with -fdefault-integer-8
> Jeff, Dave, as you can see in the above comments, I proposed this patch based
> on a previous similar patch to powerpc,
--- Comment #2 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-08-22
23:39 ---
Subject: Re: FAIL: gcc.dg/pr32912-[12].c (test for excess errors)
> The warning comes from:
> typedef int __m128i __attribute__ ((__vector_size__ (16)));
> __m128i a, b, c, d, e, f;
Right. Wo
--- Comment #1 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-08-25
22:24 ---
Subject: Re: New: FAIL: gcc.dg/builtins-20.c (test for excess errors)
test3l and test3f fail. Attached .s file.
Dave
--- Comment #2 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-08-25
22:24
--- Comment #11 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-08-30
01:43 ---
Subject: Re: [4.3 Regression] libgcc2.c:1890: internal compiler error: in
local_cprop_pass, at gcse.c:3236
> Any news on this bug?
I have been building with Steven's change for the past couple
--- Comment #8 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-08-31
01:53 ---
Subject: Re: [4.3 Regression] /usr/ccs/bin/ld: Duplicate symbol "global
destructors keyed to _ZNSt3tr112_GLOBAL__N_16i
> Was this fixed?
No, there are still duplicate symbol failures as rep
--- Comment #4 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-09-05
15:08 ---
Subject: Re: gcc.c:6236: error: passing argument 1 of 'xputenv' discards
qualifiers from pointer target type
> --- Comment #2 from ghazi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-05 06:17 ---
&
--- Comment #6 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-09-07
01:50 ---
Subject: Re: gcc.c:6236: error: passing argument 1 of 'xputenv' discards
qualifiers from pointer target type
> > > Another option would be to constify xputenv and use CONST_CAST on
--- Comment #6 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-09-07
22:05 ---
Subject: Re: Segmentation fault bootstrapping on HP-UX 11.11
> As mentioned before, I'm able to bootstrap with HP's compiler, so if this
> information doesn't help you I'll jus
--- Comment #4 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-09-09
19:27 ---
Subject: Re: [4.3 Regression] g++.old-deja/g++.eh/ia64-1.C ICEs at -O1 on
spu-elf
> Please try after r128284. See also story about this test-case for cris-elf at
> <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-pat
--- Comment #1 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-09-09
20:26 ---
Subject: Re: New: gcc: libgomp.spec: No such file or directory
> gcc: libgomp.spec: No such file or directory
It appears libgomp didn't get installed although it builds and
there are no fail
--- Comment #8 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-09-10
21:30 ---
Subject: Re: gcc.c:6236: error: passing argument 1 of 'xputenv' discards
qualifiers from pointer target type
> What is the status here?
> I tested the patch below on hppa64-hp-hpux11.11, i
--- Comment #1 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-09-11
22:45 ---
Subject: Re: New: FAIL: gcc.dg/tree-ssa/loadpre11.c scan-tree-dump-times
Eliminated: 1 1
Tree dump attached.
--- Comment #2 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-09-11
22:45
--- Comment #3 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-09-11
22:58 ---
Subject: Re: FAIL: gcc.dg/tree-ssa/loadpre11.c scan-tree-dump-times
Eliminated: 1 1
This was instroduced between 128314 (ok) and 128343 (fail).
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33402
--- Comment #4 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-09-18
22:24 ---
Subject: Re: FAIL: abi_check
> So, maybe something with libmath config, config for C99 functions?
Think so, I see asinf isn't found, yet it's there. I'm going
to remove "-j
--- Comment #7 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-09-20
02:24 ---
Subject: Re: fallback scalbn doesn't handle denormals correctly
> For some reason, I had completely forgotten about ldexp(). But as it is C89,
> it
> should be available, and as all GCC sup
--- Comment #1 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-09-21
00:41 ---
Subject: Re: New: FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/990404-1.c execution at -O3
> This fail was first observed in 4.3.0 20070901 revision 128010. It was not
> present in revision 127946.
This was intr
--- Comment #2 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-09-21
23:35 ---
Subject: Re: [4.3 regression] FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/990404-1.c execution
at -O3
Seems to have disappeared between 128564 and 128587.
Dave
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33280
--- Comment #1 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-09-28
01:41 ---
Subject: Re: New: INIT_PRIORITY is broken
On Fri, Sep 28, 2007 at 01:35:04AM -, danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> FAIL: gcc.dg/initpri1.c execution test
I've attached the assembler ou
--- Comment #2 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-09-29
16:15 ---
Subject: Re: FAIL: gfortran.dg/gamma_1.f90
> libgfortran in general assumes that a full C99 runtime is available.
lgamma and lgamma_r are available, so it should be possible to fudge
a f version. T
--- Comment #3 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-09-29
16:47 ---
Subject: Re: FAIL: gfortran.dg/gamma_1.f90
> Subject: Re: FAIL: gfortran.dg/gamma_1.f90
>
> > libgfortran in general assumes that a full C99 runtime is available.
It was the fortran f
--- Comment #5 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-09-30
21:51 ---
Subject: Re: FAIL: abi_check
> --- Comment #3 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-18 21:54 ---
> These all appear to be fails from missing C99 math functionality: tanl, etc.
>
&g
--- Comment #5 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-09-30
22:31 ---
Subject: Re: FAIL: gfortran.dg/gamma_1.f90
> The patch below should provide fallback functions (build in maintainer mode or
> use autoreconf in libgfortran), does it work?
I'll give this a
--- Comment #3 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-10-01
15:23 ---
Subject: Re: FAIL: gfortran.dg/integer_exponentiation_4.f90 -O (internal
compiler error)
> You might also want to build GMP and MPFR with internal checking enabled
> (--enable-assert, I think). D
--- Comment #2 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-10-01
16:33 ---
Subject: Re: FAIL: gfortran.dg/nint_2.f90 -O0 execution test
> It should print "0 1 1". If it prints "1 1 1", then your system libm has a
> bug.
It prints "0 1 1&qu
--- Comment #4 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-10-01
17:29 ---
Subject: Re: FAIL: gfortran.dg/nint_2.f90 -O0 execution test
> Does hpux10 have round()? And does it have ceil()? (I assume that the last
> answer is yes, because it's ANSI C, but hpux could
--- Comment #3 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-10-03
21:23 ---
Subject: Re: bootstrap with ada failed
> --- Comment #2 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-03 06:08
> ---
> Try to revert the big SRA patch.
128907 is ok. 128908 is brok
--- Comment #5 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-10-05
03:48 ---
Subject: Re: bootstrap with ada failed
Ignore.
Dave
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33634
--- Comment #6 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-10-05
03:52 ---
Subject: Re: bootstrap with ada failed
Ignore.
Dave
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33634
--- Comment #9 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-10-05
19:02 ---
Subject: Re: bootstrap with ada failed
> --- Comment #8 from aoliva at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-05 18:17
> ---
> Actually, Dave tells me in one of the "Ignored" entries th
--- Comment #2 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-10-08
19:32 ---
Subject: Re: FAIL: 17_intro/headers/all_pedantic_errors.cc (test for excess
errors)
> --- Comment #1 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2007-10-08 18:57 ---
> So the problem is new, right? Has it
--- Comment #4 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-10-08
20:10 ---
Subject: Re: FAIL: 17_intro/headers/all_pedantic_errors.cc (test for excess
errors)
> That's strange. I am looking at it. I ran the libstdc++ testsuite
> before and did not see this proble
--- Comment #6 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-10-08
23:01 ---
Subject: Re: FAIL: 17_intro/headers/all_pedantic_errors.cc (test for excess
errors)
> I only tested in Linux.
This was not introduced by your change. The problem is the use of
an C99 extension (l
--- Comment #2 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-10-09
01:45 ---
Subject: Re: FAIL: gfortran.dg/gamma_5.f90
> --- Comment #1 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 01:32
> ---
> Just before the #include in trans-intrinsic.c we could d
--- Comment #4 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-10-09
02:11 ---
Subject: Re: FAIL: gfortran.dg/gamma_5.f90
>/* Functions built into gcc itself. */
> +#ifndef tgamma
> +#define tgamma gamma
> +#endif
> +
> #include "mathbuiltins.def"
--- Comment #6 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-10-09
02:39 ---
Subject: Re: FAIL: gfortran.dg/gamma_5.f90
> --- Comment #5 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 02:18
> ---
> I was just looking at a DOC search and for HP-UX 11i
--- Comment #4 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-10-10
17:04 ---
Subject: Re: 1938 unexpected fails in libjava testsuite
The attached patch fixes the problem.
Dave
--- Comment #5 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-10-10
17:04 ---
Created an
--- Comment #8 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-10-10
21:39 ---
Subject: Re: 1938 unexpected fails in libjava testsuite
> I don't think this code is used on HP/UX? If it were, it might be good to
> test
> there.
HP/UX doesn't appear to have, pth
--- Comment #8 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-10-11
01:26 ---
Subject: Re: FAIL: 17_intro/headers/all_pedantic_errors.cc (test for excess
errors)
> Looking at the testresults, it appears to have been introduced between
> 128587 and 128594 in September. Th
--- Comment #3 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-10-14
21:44 ---
Subject: Re: FAIL: 17_intro/headers/c++1998/all.cc (test for excess errors)
> Are you willing to prepare and test on your target a patch along those lines?
> Specifically, I would suggest followi
--- Comment #6 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-10-15
13:20 ---
Subject: Re: FAIL: 21_strings/headers/cwchar/macros.cc (test for excess
errors)
> --- Comment #1 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2007-10-15 09:12 ---
> What does it mean "These are define
--- Comment #7 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-10-15
13:28 ---
Subject: Re: FAIL: 21_strings/headers/cwchar/macros.cc (test for excess
errors)
> --- Comment #5 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2007-10-15 09:35 ---
> Fixed.
I don't believe the chang
--- Comment #8 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-10-19
22:16 ---
Subject: Re: [4.2 Regression] ICE in delete_output_reload, at reload1.c:7926
> #1 0x00601eac in delete_output_reload (insn=0x2b78f71e4140, j=1,
> last_reload_reg=21)
> at gcc-4.2/gc
--- Comment #1 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-10-18
23:55 ---
Subject: Re: New: collect2 doesn't strip .sl version
On Sun, 14 Oct 2007, danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> After recently updating libgmp, I find that shared libraries that
> were lin
--- Comment #1 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-10-20
20:53 ---
Subject: Re: New:
gcc.c-torture/execute/longlong.c execution at -O3
Comparing 4.2 to 4.3, the significant difference in main appears to be:
4.2)
ldw 140(%r20),%r19 ;, tmp115
--- Additional Comments From dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca
2005-02-25 04:37 ---
Subject: Re: [4.0 Regression] g++.dg/abi/inline1.C fails on hp
> It builds successfully on hppa64-hp-hpux11.11. There seem to be some
> regression in the gfortran suite but none elsewhe
--- Additional Comments From dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca
2005-03-01 15:06 ---
Subject: Re: wide character strings don't work on HP-UX
> --- Additional Comments From pcarlini at suse dot de 2005-03-01 11:01
> ---
> Unfortunately, bad news: if I reme
--- Additional Comments From dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca
2005-03-02 00:44 ---
Subject: Re: New: [4.1.0 Regression] Link error: unsatisfied s
Oops, I hit reload. This is a duplicate.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20271
--- Additional Comments From dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca
2005-03-07 00:06 ---
Subject: Re: FAIL: 26_numerics/complex/pow.cc execution test
> The implementation of complex::pow can be definitely improved, and will, as
> soon
> as Roger's work on signbit goes i
--- Additional Comments From dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca
2005-03-07 01:08 ---
Subject: Re: FAIL: 26_numerics/complex/pow.cc execution test
> > Yes, this test doesn't fail on hpux 11. This probably implies a
> > hpux 10 math library issue. I see the follow
--- Additional Comments From dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca
2005-03-07 01:31 ---
Subject: Re: FAIL: 26_numerics/complex/pow.cc execution test
> We have log(x) == -inf for x == 0+. The exp call is returning 0+
> but the argument isn't -inf. It's -5.99231
--- Additional Comments From dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca
2005-03-07 01:41 ---
Subject: Re: FAIL: 26_numerics/complex/pow.cc execution test
> > We have log(x) == -inf for x == 0+. The exp call is returning 0+
> > but the argument isn't -inf. It's -5
--- Additional Comments From dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca
2005-03-07 02:04 ---
Subject: Re: FAIL: 26_numerics/complex/pow.cc execution test
> The only other tricky bit of the computation seems atan2(0.0, 0.0)
> which should be also zero, of course.
This is the p
--- Additional Comments From dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca
2005-03-07 04:03 ---
Subject: Re: FAIL: 26_numerics/complex/pow.cc execution test
> Note that HUGE_VAL == INFINITY on IEEE hosts.
I don't believe that's the case for HP-UX 10.20. The define for
--- Additional Comments From dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca
2005-03-07 14:52 ---
Subject: Re: FAIL: 26_numerics/complex/pow.cc execution test
> Can you test it on the targets you have access to?
I'll try this evening.
Thanks,
Dave
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/
--- Additional Comments From dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca
2005-03-08 14:35 ---
Subject: Re: FAIL: 26_numerics/complex/pow.cc execution test
> Digging more (in C99 and Posix), it seems that pow(x,y) always behaves the
> same
> for x == +0 and x == -0: this would i
ex logic that I
won't bore you with here. Suffice to say we are now doing the test properly...
All the best,
Dave
On RH9 Linux:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> gfc --version
GNU Fortran 95 (GCC 4.0.0 20050224 (experimental))
...
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> cat ~/packages/bugs/gfc_pointer_problem2.f90
[EMAIL
--- Additional Comments From dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca
2005-03-13 00:13 ---
Subject: Re: locale testsuite fails when GCC is configured with --disable-nls
> This issue seems related (or maybe we should open a separate PR?)
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2004-12
601 - 700 of 1351 matches
Mail list logo
