https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63931
Arnaud Charlet changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
||charlet at gcc dot gnu.org
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Target Milestone|--- |4.10.0
--- Comment #1 from Arnaud Charlet ---
Should be fixed now (commit rev 213201).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60652
--- Comment #2 from Arnaud Charlet ---
Author: charlet
Date: Tue Jul 29 14:46:27 2014
New Revision: 213201
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=213201&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2014-07-29 Robert Dewar
* gnat_rm.texi, sem_prag.adb: Minor ref
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62019
Arnaud Charlet changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
||charlet at gcc dot gnu.org
Version|4.4.1 |4.8.2
Resolution|--- |FIXED
--- Comment #20 from Arnaud Charlet ---
Closing then
||charlet at gcc dot gnu.org
Resolution|--- |WONTFIX
--- Comment #4 from Arnaud Charlet ---
There is no bug here, GNAT's behavior is permitted and differences between
static and dynamic expressions are definitely to be expected in general.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44029
Arnaud Charlet changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||charlet at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66143
Arnaud Charlet changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||charlet at gcc dot gnu.org
||charlet at gcc dot gnu.org
Resolution|--- |INVALID
--- Comment #1 from Arnaud Charlet ---
You need to use an older version of GNAT in order to bootstrap GNAT, and
not the other way around which isn't guaranteed to work (and indeed often
won't).
||charlet at gcc dot gnu.org
Resolution||INVALID
--- Comment #3 from Arnaud Charlet 2011-03-21
08:05:55 UTC ---
This error is specific to your set up/build procedures, which isn't a standard
set up, so not supported by the FSF compil
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49819
Arnaud Charlet changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||charlet at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49819
--- Comment #3 from Arnaud Charlet 2011-07-23
09:19:47 UTC ---
Author: charlet
Date: Sat Jul 23 09:19:44 2011
New Revision: 176673
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=176673
Log:
2011-07-23 Arnaud Charlet
PR ada/49819
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49819
Arnaud Charlet changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47880
--- Comment #1 from Arnaud Charlet 2011-08-04
08:32:58 UTC ---
Author: charlet
Date: Thu Aug 4 08:32:54 2011
New Revision: 177332
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=177332
Log:
2011-08-04 Thomas Quinot
PR ada/47880
||charlet at gcc dot gnu.org
Resolution||FIXED
Target Milestone|--- |4.7.0
--- Comment #2 from Arnaud Charlet 2011-08-04
08:34:36 UTC ---
Fixed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95953
Arnaud Charlet changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
|--- |FIXED
CC||charlet at gcc dot gnu.org
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
--- Comment #2 from Arnaud Charlet ---
Right, closing accordingly.
||charlet at gcc dot gnu.org
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
--- Comment #1 from Arnaud Charlet ---
Yes, that's as expected: support for project files has been moved entirely to
gprbuild. If you have gprbuild in your path, gnatmake -Pproject will
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98341
Arnaud Charlet changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||charlet at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98341
--- Comment #9 from Arnaud Charlet ---
The problem is somehow specific to m68k, for some unknown reason. There is
nothing target specific in the change, no assumption is made on the underlying
target.
What we need now is a debugging session from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86916
Arnaud Charlet changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||charlet at gcc dot gnu.org
Target
|--- |WONTFIX
CC||charlet at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1 from Arnaud Charlet ---
This is indeed now expected, see https://gcc.gnu.org/install/prerequisites.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104751
Arnaud Charlet changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||charlet at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104861
--- Comment #4 from Arnaud Charlet ---
Patch looks good to me, it's approved assuming clean testing, thanks!
|--- |9.4
CC||charlet at gcc dot gnu.org
Resolution|--- |FIXED
--- Comment #2 from Arnaud Charlet ---
Great, thanks for checking!
|--- |FIXED
Target Milestone|--- |11.0
CC||charlet at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3 from Arnaud Charlet ---
Closing then!
||charlet at gcc dot gnu.org
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
--- Comment #5 from Arnaud Charlet ---
Closing then!
||charlet at gcc dot gnu.org
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
--- Comment #8 from Arnaud Charlet ---
Closing
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79724
Arnaud Charlet changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||charlet at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79724
--- Comment #7 from Arnaud Charlet ---
Understood, I'll work on it then, thanks for your help!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79724
Arnaud Charlet changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104027
--- Comment #4 from Arnaud Charlet ---
Thanks for the report and investigation. The issue is actually caused by the
introduction of a "ghost" (empty for code generation purposes) unit
a-nbnbbig.ads, since the change you mentioned didn't change t
||charlet at gcc dot gnu.org
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
--- Comment #10 from Arnaud Charlet ---
Indeed, closing, thanks!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103357
--- Comment #2 from Arnaud Charlet ---
If you mean that you are building version X of gcc version version Y (newer
than X) of gcc/gnat, then this is as expected and documented: this combination
will not always work and isn't supported. You need
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103357
Arnaud Charlet changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||charlet at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102073
Arnaud Charlet changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89863
Bug 89863 depends on bug 102073, which changed state.
Bug 102073 Summary: gcc/ada/socket.c: 2 * missing return
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102073
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100486
Arnaud Charlet changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |charlet at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100486
--- Comment #59 from Arnaud Charlet ---
Right, PR ada/80590.
And yes, the previous PR was more of a special case while this PR is in the
middle of the bootstrap path (triggers as part of compiling a-except.adb).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100486
--- Comment #61 from Arnaud Charlet ---
(In reply to Eric Botcazou from comment #60)
> > And yes, the previous PR was more of a special case while this PR is in the
> > middle of the bootstrap path (triggers as part of compiling a-except.adb).
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100486
--- Comment #63 from Arnaud Charlet ---
(In reply to Eric Botcazou from comment #62)
> > No need to, there are actually several reasons to not rely on exception
> > propagation during bootstrap, so let's restore this invariant instead, I'm
> > t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100486
--- Comment #74 from Arnaud Charlet ---
The patch is desirable even outside of this PR, so we'll keep it. And as shown
by PR105507, we have other exception propagation that crept in unintentionally,
so I'll also have a look at these when I get a
||charlet at gcc dot gnu.org
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Target Milestone|--- |13.0
--- Comment #3 from Arnaud Charlet ---
fixed on master
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101924
Arnaud Charlet changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||charlet at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102073
Arnaud Charlet changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |charlet at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113862
Arnaud Charlet changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||charlet at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114065
Arnaud Charlet changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||charlet at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114065
--- Comment #29 from Arnaud Charlet ---
Hi Nicolas,
Reviewing v10 (and v11), I have the following comments left:
For patch 1/8, the change in a-calcon.ads is still too intrusive (incompatible
types used), we want to keep the interface (spec) unc
||charlet at gcc dot gnu.org
Resolution|--- |INVALID
--- Comment #1 from Arnaud Charlet ---
This is actually as intended and defined in the Ada RM: -1 actually corresponds
to "-" (the unary operator) and the literal 1, and not the lite
101 - 149 of 149 matches
Mail list logo
