--- Comment #11 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-15 20:02 ---
Subject: Bug 32666
Author: bkoz
Date: Thu Jan 15 20:02:11 2009
New Revision: 143406
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=143406
Log:
2009-01-15 Benjamin Kosnik
PR libstdc
--- Comment #13 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-16 02:26 ---
Ouch. I see this also on arm-elf crosses, whoops.
Here's a patch that I'm currently testing on cross. If it fixes it, then I'll
check it in and then please try on hpux.
--
bkoz at gcc dot gnu
--- Comment #14 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-16 02:26 ---
Created an attachment (id=17112)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=17112&action=view)
add in stubs.c for long double only
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32666
--- Comment #6 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-20 18:50 ---
This code block appears to be capable of generating no end of issues, sadly.
For the record, POSIX head docs say -n is a requirement for conformance, at
least p.2791 of EEE Std 1003.1-2008. Of course, who knows if
--- Comment #9 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-20 18:52 ---
Mine
--
bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at
--- Comment #19 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-20 19:25 ---
Fixed for 4.4.0
--
bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status
--- Comment #10 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-20 19:31 ---
Subject: Bug 38919
Author: bkoz
Date: Tue Jan 20 19:30:51 2009
New Revision: 143526
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=143526
Log:
2009-01-20 Benjamin Kosnik
Raine
--- Comment #11 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-20 19:44 ---
Should be fixed now.
--
bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status
--- Comment #39 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-20 20:02 ---
Hey all. It looks like the libstdc++ part of this is fixed. Therefore, I am
going to slightly edit the subject, un-assign myself, and change the component
to target. Although I suppose it could be binutils.
>F
--- Comment #9 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-20 20:56 ---
I don't think this is a libstdc++ bug per se, but configure/build and possibly
libtool-related. But I don't see a configure/build category (only a keyword),
so the current mis-categorization shall contin
--- Comment #3 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-21 04:04 ---
Subject: Bug 38834
Author: bkoz
Date: Wed Jan 21 04:04:24 2009
New Revision: 143538
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=143538
Log:
2009-01-20 Benjamin Kosnik
Uro
--- Comment #4 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-21 18:02 ---
Mine.
--
bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at
--- Comment #5 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-21 18:02 ---
fixed.
--
bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #3 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-21 22:19 ---
Confirmed for s390x.
This is causing the following s390x libstdc++ testsuite failures, and is thus a
regression from 4.3. As far as I can tell these warnings are spurious.
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2009
--- Comment #1 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-21 22:24 ---
I see this as well. See 38851 for more spurious uninitialized warnings.
This is a regression from 4.3, and IMHO is not minor.
--
bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #2 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-21 22:41 ---
fix summary
--
bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[4.3
--- Comment #4 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-21 22:41 ---
fixed summary
--
bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work
s: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: diagnostic
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: middle-end
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org
GCC host triplet: s390x-redhat-linux
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38937
--- Comment #43 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-22 21:40 ---
Subject: Bug 38384
Author: bkoz
Date: Thu Jan 22 21:40:23 2009
New Revision: 143576
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=143576
Log:
2009-01-22 Benjamin Kosnik
PR libstdc
--- Comment #44 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-22 22:01 ---
Hey. I couldn't stop myself: since Dave said that HPUX doesn't support symbol
versioning, (no way, no how) I have changed libstdc++ configure to reflect
this.
:)
Ranier, great to see you got something wor
--- Comment #6 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-24 01:52 ---
Mine.
--
bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at
--- Comment #7 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-24 02:30 ---
Please note there are no ABI baseline files checked in to the FSF GCC
repository for darwin for this (or any) release on this (or any) architecture.
Without these, there can be no automated ABI testing by the GCC
--- Comment #2 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-24 02:33 ---
Mine.
--
bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at
--- Comment #3 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-24 02:45 ---
Please note there are no ABI baseline files checked in to the FSF GCC
repository for darwin for this (or any) release on this (or any) architecture.
Without these, there can be no automated ABI testing by the GCC
--- Comment #2 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-24 02:57 ---
Mine.
--
bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at
--- Comment #3 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-24 03:20 ---
Please note there are no ABI baseline files checked in to the FSF GCC
repository for darwin for this (or any) release on this (or any) architecture.
Without these, there can be no automated ABI testing by the GCC
--- Comment #21 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-24 03:42 ---
This is fixed for hpux on trunk, and I believe it should be fixed for solaris
as well. Can some solaris tester confirm?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28125
--- Comment #30 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-26 23:31 ---
This appears to have been fixed in the gcc-4.3.0 time frame. At least,
gcc-4.2.4 has:
dependency_libs='
-L/mnt/share/bld/gcc-4.2.4/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/libstdc++-
v3/src
-L/mnt/share/bld/gcc-4.2.4/x86_64-un
--- Comment #7 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-27 00:19 ---
Updating this bug report.
This specific test case can no longer be reproduced as of gcc-4.0.x (and
continuing to 4.1.x, 4.2.x, 4.3.x, and today's trunk.)
This appears to be as a result of -std=gnu99 being req
--- Comment #19 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-27 00:23 ---
Fixed by 4.3.2
--
bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status
--- Comment #9 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-27 00:26 ---
Update summary.
--
bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|parse
--- Comment #14 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-27 01:02 ---
Fixed as of gcc-4.2.x.
--
bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-27 01:03 ---
Add documentation keyword
--
bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #8 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-27 01:12 ---
Closing due to inactivity. If this is still a problem on a release branch (ie,
gcc-4.3.x and above), please re-open and provide details.
--
bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #7 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-27 01:22 ---
This could be fixed via a dg-skip-if embedded target type thing.
I don't remember seeing this fail in recent arm-elf crosses. Is this still an
active issue?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15088
--- Comment #6 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-27 01:30 ---
Hey HP, is this still an issue? Don't see test results for this target for any
currently-open gcc branches. Update please.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21321
--- Comment #22 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-27 01:41 ---
waiting for feedback on a current release branch (4.3) or trunk.
--
bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-27 04:03 ---
Fixed on trunk and gcc-4.3.4
--
bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-27 04:04 ---
Fixed
--
bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #3 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-27 04:23 ---
This seems like a template linkage bug specific to the powerpc-darwin8.5.0
target, probably related to simulated/incomplete support of comdat and weak
linkage on that platform via coalesced symbols. It seems unlikely
--- Comment #5 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-27 04:30 ---
I see:
# For LFS support.
GLIBCXX_CHECK_LFS
as part of the generic libstdc++ configuration in configure.ac for gcc trunk.
Therefore, LFS config is the same codepath for cross and native. Thus, if
mingw32 supports
--- Comment #13 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-27 17:26 ---
*** Bug 25956 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-27 17:26 ---
Duplicate
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 28017 ***
--
bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-27 18:55 ---
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2009-01/msg00417.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38983
--- Comment #8 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-27 19:47 ---
4.2.1 arm-eabi doesn't show this:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2007-07/msg00989.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15088
--- Comment #9 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-27 20:49 ---
Looks to me like the flipside of libstdc++/7439. More broadly speaking, C99
macros vs. C++98/0x. The current status on this issue is:
For 4.1/4.2/4.3/trunk, C99 macros should be visible with
1) -std=gnu99/c99 in
--- Comment #14 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-28 01:41 ---
Mine.
--
bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at
--- Comment #15 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-28 03:25 ---
Here are my thoughts on how to fix this. None of the presented options is
workable, IMHO.
The preferred end goal is to only have the compatibilty.cc and
compatibilty-ldbl.cc objects in the shared library, and not in
--- Comment #2 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-28 20:35 ---
Adjust summary, change to enhancement.
I would really like to use std::is_standard_layout in the testsuite, so that
these requirements for , , and can be
validated for libstdc++ sources. The requirements
--- Comment #3 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-30 20:56 ---
Created an attachment (id=17216)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=17216&action=view)
remove visibility attribute with -D_GLIBCXX_VISIBILITY=0, run testuite with it
and -fvisibility
--- Comment #3 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-04 22:33 ---
No feedback.
--
bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status
--- Comment #35 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-12 22:43 ---
Closing.
--
bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #10 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-12 23:01 ---
Sorry for the delay Paolo, this fix looks fine.
I see tanhl missing too in that log, yet the gnu.ver exports have it and so
does src/math_compatibility_long_double.cc, although depending on
_GLIBCXX_HAVE_TANHL. What
--- Comment #3 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-12 23:06 ---
Closing as resolved, duplicate of 36801 pending feedback from submitter. If you
feel this is incorrect please re-open and respond to comment #2.
--
bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #1 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-22 07:19 ---
Subject: Bug 40221
Author: bkoz
Date: Fri May 22 07:19:37 2009
New Revision: 147794
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=147794
Log:
2009-05-21 Benjamin Kosnik
PR libstdc
1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libstdc++
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40263
--
bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org
--- Comment #2 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-27 20:15 ---
TR1 uniform_real is not normalized, thus the surprising results. So, I used
variate_generator.
--
bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-27 20:32 ---
Subject: Bug 40273
Author: bkoz
Date: Wed May 27 20:32:30 2009
New Revision: 147930
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=147930
Log:
2009-05-27 Benjamin Kosnik
PR libstdc
--- Comment #3 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-27 20:36 ---
Fixed
--
bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #14 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-28 18:53 ---
Back, and on darwin as well.
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2009-05/msg02455.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2009-05/msg02457.html
Please hang on while I work through this.
--
bkoz at gcc dot
--- Comment #15 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-28 18:53 ---
Mine
--
bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at
--- Comment #20 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-29 01:13 ---
Created an attachment (id=17929)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=17929&action=view)
reworked version of throw_allocator
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40094
--- Comment #21 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-29 01:20 ---
Yeah Paolo, didn't these this was due to your rework. I think the test cases
are ok now, seems like a better starting place although we may need to add
// { dg-require-cxa-atexit "" }
on more of th
--- Comment #1 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-18 00:00 ---
Agreed. Thanks for the feedback on docs. Will put this on the docs todo list.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40380
--- Comment #3 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-18 00:33 ---
Jonathan, you are right. These assertions are all backwards. I see this hitting
the following members:
load
store
compare_exchange_strong
I should have done tests for this, obviously. Ouch. Now you've done thi
--- Comment #2 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-18 00:34 ---
Add documentation keyword
--
bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #24 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-06 23:49 ---
Closing due to lack of feedback
--
bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-06 23:55 ---
Yes, I will look at this. I think Ben Elliston pointed this out right after
4.4.0 was released, along with some other uninitialized warnings that I then
fixed.
Apparently this is also visible on ppc.
--
bkoz at
Component: c++
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40738
--- Comment #1 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-13 23:40 ---
eek that should be expected 'typename' before...
--
bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #13 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-20 21:52 ---
Hi Peter! You say that this is broken as of rev 149763, which is a commit from
July 17, 2009. Here:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2009-07/msg00645.html
But you also indicate that this has been broken for some time
ed with -O0, -O1 then it's ok.
--
Summary: ICE: at optimization -02
Product: gcc
Version: 4.5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #1 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-08-06 18:09 ---
Created an attachment (id=18313)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18313&action=view)
pre-processed sources to reproduce
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40991
--- Comment #5 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-04 17:05 ---
In addition to the current ability to put visibility attributes on file and
class scope, the ability to put visibility attributes on namespace scope is
desired.
The syntax is straight forward extension of existing
--- Comment #3 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-04 17:06 ---
Agh. Sorry, I had not realized that I'd filed this six months ago.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24668
--- Comment #6 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-04 17:41 ---
In general, we make no claims as to ABI compliance wrt development/trunk
versions.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21072
--- Comment #8 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-08 23:12 ---
We'd certainly not forget about this on the branch.
However, I decided to just go ahead and do this anyway, because it is a change
in behavior but mostly because it seems to be confusing people/distros WRT
--- Comment #5 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-09 18:36 ---
Created an attachment (id=10190)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=10190&action=view)
tentative patch
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23591
--- Comment #3 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-10 02:05 ---
Subject: Bug 22203
Author: bkoz
Date: Thu Nov 10 02:05:13 2005
New Revision: 106727
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=106727
Log:
2005-11-09 Benjamin Kosnik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Comment #10 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-17 21:53 ---
Created an attachment (id=10271)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=10271&action=view)
Kona paper, as revised but not in post-Kona mailing
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24660
--- Comment #11 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-17 21:54 ---
Created an attachment (id=10272)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=10272&action=view)
Outline for Kona presentation
I cannot believe I found this stuff.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/b
--- Comment #12 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-17 22:15 ---
Here you go Jason. Actually, it looks like I have a complete archive of most
parts of this discussion, the related material, code samples, issues, etc. If
you would like, I will tar it up and put it in this pr. Or
--- Comment #14 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-17 23:41 ---
> I think nesting _6 within std makes sense in the abstract as well, as it
> is properly part of the standard library space, not a separate entity.
Sounds sane to me.
> The debug mode headers will n
--- Comment #7 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-17 23:53 ---
What do you mean, "less or equal visibility to their enclosing scope?"
My meta-goal is to try and give namespace and class scope visibilty attributes
similar meanings. Do you think this is worthwhile, pos
--- Comment #6 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-22 06:54 ---
Subject: Bug 23591
Author: bkoz
Date: Tue Nov 22 06:54:08 2005
New Revision: 107350
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=107350
Log:
2005-11-21 Benjamin Kosnik <[EMAI
--- Comment #2 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-02 18:59 ---
We are trying to keep the libstc++ code as clean and representative of
standards-conforming C++ code as possible, and have avoided __try, __catch,
etc. or other uglification in favor of the actual C++ terms, ie try
--- Comment #3 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-07 00:16 ---
I still want this.
Someday...
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21494
--- Comment #20 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-07 19:01 ---
> I have customers using Obj C++ who want to turn off C++
> exception support, but retain Obj C exception support. [snip]
What does this even mean? Can you detail or explain how this is supposed to
work?
--- Comment #7 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-12 17:22 ---
There is a feature request to assign visibility attributes to namespaces. If
this is done, then making anonymous namespaces hidden will just be a sub-class
of that work.
That enhancement request is
c++/21764
Some
--- Comment #16 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-13 20:27 ---
Two extra fails with both versioning and debug associations active.
FAIL: 20_util/memory/16505.cc (test for excess errors)
FAIL: 25_algorithms/search_n/11400.cc (test for excess errors)
For the first:
#include
--- Comment #17 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-13 20:38 ---
Created an attachment (id=10475)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=10475&action=view)
test case for first fail
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24660
--- Comment #18 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-13 20:39 ---
Created an attachment (id=10476)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=10476&action=view)
test case for second fail
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24660
--- Comment #19 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-14 07:23 ---
Created an attachment (id=10483)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=10483&action=view)
libstdc++ patch v5
Config not quite 100% correct, but good enough.
This moves all debug mode stuff to
--- Comment #20 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-14 09:12 ---
This arrangement of debug mode does indeed seem to fix the longstanding swap
issue.
ie, -D_GLIBCXX_DEBUG runs are == normal runs.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24660
--- Comment #5 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-14 17:16 ---
I'm encouraged by this work!!! Great news.
The reason this would be useful is that then it would be possible to use a
single macro to represent both scope and namespace. Ie,
#define ACTIVE_SCOPE
work
--- Comment #22 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-17 09:15 ---
This patch is complete with one exception, libsupc++. It looks like
--disable-hosted-libstdcxx is broken right now, so I have to fix that and then
make it work with this scheme.
http://people.redhat.com/bkoz/libstdc
--- Comment #8 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-18 00:20 ---
This appears resolved.
--
bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-18 00:22 ---
What is the configure log for libstdc++ when you use --enable-shared=libstdc++
on win32? You should see something about shared libraries being enabled.
-benjamin
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id
rror 2
make[1]: Leaving directory `/mnt/hd/bld/gcc.versioned-freestanding'
make: *** [all] Error 2
--
Summary: --disable-hosted-libstdcxx does not work
Product: gcc
Version: 4.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libstdc++
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25472
301 - 400 of 1176 matches
Mail list logo
