[Bug bootstrap/56227] New: Bootstrap failure on MinGW building ggc-page.c

2013-02-06 Thread craig.powers at gmail dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56227 Bug #: 56227 Summary: Bootstrap failure on MinGW building ggc-page.c Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug bootstrap/56227] Bootstrap failure on MinGW building ggc-page.c

2013-02-06 Thread craig.powers at gmail dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56227 --- Comment #2 from Craig Powers 2013-02-06 18:42:58 UTC --- (In reply to comment #1) > Created attachment 29374 [details] > proposed patch to use HOST_LONG_LONG_FORMAT > > Please try to bootstrap with the attached patch. That fixes

[Bug bootstrap/56227] Bootstrap failure on MinGW building ggc-page.c

2013-02-06 Thread craig.powers at gmail dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56227 --- Comment #3 from Craig Powers 2013-02-06 18:50:34 UTC --- There's another one on line 14622 of gcc/config/i386/i386.c.

[Bug bootstrap/56227] Bootstrap failure on MinGW building ggc-page.c

2013-02-06 Thread craig.powers at gmail dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56227 --- Comment #4 from Craig Powers 2013-02-06 18:54:39 UTC --- (In reply to comment #3) > There's another one on line 14622 of gcc/config/i386/i386.c. Doing the same substitution as in ggc-page.c fixes it.

[Bug bootstrap/56227] Bootstrap failure on MinGW building ggc-page.c

2013-02-06 Thread craig.powers at gmail dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56227 --- Comment #5 from Craig Powers 2013-02-06 19:03:10 UTC --- ../../gcc-4.8-20130203/gcc/lto/lto.c: In function 'void lto_resolution_read(spla y_tree, FILE*, lto_file*)': ../../gcc-4.8-20130203/gcc/lto/lto.c:2229:33: error: unknown convers

[Bug bootstrap/56227] Bootstrap failure on MinGW building ggc-page.c

2013-02-06 Thread craig.powers at gmail dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56227 --- Comment #7 from Craig Powers 2013-02-06 20:19:15 UTC --- (In reply to comment #6) > (In reply to comment #5) > > ../../gcc-4.8-20130203/gcc/lto/lto.c: In function 'void > > lto_resolution_read(spla > > y_tree, FILE*, lto_file*)': >

[Bug fortran/49111] Unnecessary warning for private interfaces having the BIND(C) attribute

2012-10-12 Thread craig.powers at gmail dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49111 Craig Powers changed: What|Removed |Added CC||craig.powers at gmail dot

[Bug fortran/47260] New: DLLEXPORT attribute requires additional capabilities to be useful

2011-01-11 Thread craig.powers at gmail dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47260 Summary: DLLEXPORT attribute requires additional capabilities to be useful Product: gcc Version: 4.6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 C

[Bug fortran/47260] DLLEXPORT attribute requires additional capabilities to be useful

2011-01-11 Thread craig.powers at gmail dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47260 --- Comment #1 from Craig Powers 2011-01-11 23:12:55 UTC --- I've also tried using dlltool and a .def file to coerce my procedure into being exported, with no luck. Does gfortran not support exporting a function?

[Bug fortran/47260] DLLEXPORT: TREE_PUBLIC for procedures lost between trans-decl.c and tree.c

2011-01-12 Thread craig.powers at gmail dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47260 --- Comment #6 from Craig Powers 2011-01-12 14:11:28 UTC --- I also was unable to get the procedure into a DLL with omission of DLLEXPORT, instead attempting to get it in using a .DEF file and either gfortran or dlltool. I'm not sure if that refl

[Bug fortran/47260] DLLEXPORT: TREE_PUBLIC for procedures lost between trans-decl.c and tree.c

2011-01-13 Thread craig.powers at gmail dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47260 --- Comment #7 from Craig Powers 2011-01-13 16:59:18 UTC --- (In reply to comment #6) > I also was unable to get the procedure into a DLL with omission of DLLEXPORT, > instead attempting to get it in using a .DEF file and either gfortran or > dll

[Bug fortran/47260] DLLEXPORT: TREE_PUBLIC for procedures lost between trans-decl.c and tree.c

2011-01-13 Thread craig.powers at gmail dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47260 --- Comment #11 from Craig Powers 2011-01-13 19:56:11 UTC --- (In reply to comment #10) > > Please confirm that it works. (I know that it unfortunately might take a few > days until a newer MinGW build becomes available, unless you build GCC > y

[Bug fortran/47260] DLLEXPORT: TREE_PUBLIC for procedures lost between trans-decl.c and tree.c

2011-01-13 Thread craig.powers at gmail dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47260 --- Comment #12 from Craig Powers 2011-01-14 00:10:29 UTC --- Rather more tricky to get gcc built in mingw than I would have liked, but... it's all fixed. I can export with DLLEXPORT or with a .def file. Thanks for the quick fix!

[Bug bootstrap/37888] make install fails attempting to build gcc/intl.c

2010-09-29 Thread craig.powers at gmail dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37888 --- Comment #2 from Craig Powers 2010-09-29 13:42:58 UTC --- I'll try to find time to try again. I'm no longer at school as I was when I reported the bug originally; I still have access to the systems I was using then, but I have to do it remote

[Bug bootstrap/37888] make install fails attempting to build gcc/intl.c

2010-09-29 Thread craig.powers at gmail dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37888 --- Comment #2 from Craig Powers 2010-09-29 13:42:58 UTC --- I'll try to find time to try again. I'm no longer at school as I was when I reported the bug originally; I still have access to the systems I was using then, but I have to do it remote

[Bug bootstrap/37888] make install fails attempting to build gcc/intl.c

2010-09-29 Thread craig.powers at gmail dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37888 --- Comment #3 from Craig Powers 2010-09-29 13:43:02 UTC --- I'll try to find time to try again. I'm no longer at school as I was when I reported the bug originally; I still have access to the systems I was using then, but I have to do it remote