g++-3.{2,3}: dangling link in man1
Package: g++-3.2, g++-3.3 Version: 1:3.2.3-4, 1:3.3-3 Severity: minor Hi, , | /etc/cron.daily/man-db: | mandb: warning: /usr/share/man/man1/i386-linux-g++-3.3.1 is a dangling symlink | mandb: warning: /usr/share/man/man1/i386-linux-g++-3.2.1 is a dangling symlink ` They should point to the same man pages, but with .gz concatenated (g++-3.2.1.gz and g++-3.3.1.gz). Sure it's a very minor bug :-) but I'm trying hard to support your great efforts, and minor bugs are great to fix. Thanks -- System Information: Debian Release: testing/unstable Architecture: i386 Kernel: Linux pulsar 2.4.18-bf2.4 #1 Son Apr 14 09:53:28 CEST 2002 i686 Locale: LANG=fr_FR, LC_CTYPE=fr_FR
Bug#196563: Processed: Re: Bug#196563: fontconfig: [m68k] segfault during postinst
> > Indeed, all freetype/libfreetype combos did work fine with > > libfreetype6_2.1.4-1_m68k.deb and libfreetype6_2.1.4-2_m68k.deb from the > > apt cache. > > You mean fontconfig/libfreetype? Nope, fontconfig/libfonconfig1 - any of those work as long as libfreetype is OK. Michael
xfree86 compilation / gcc-3.3 strict aliasing
Looking at the build logs you'll see many warnings: dereferencing type-punned pointer will break strict-aliasing rules Is it safe to ignore these warnings? Please could you try to compile using -O2 -fno-strict-aliasing to see if this is related to the recent miscompilation using gcc-3.3? Thanks, Matthias
Bug#197090: gcj-3.3: babel fails with 3.3, works with 3.2...
This report is very vague. Should it be submitted to bugzilla anyway? Adam C Powell IV writes: > Package: gcj-3.3 > Version: 1:3.3-3 > Severity: normal > > Hello, > > Okay, so this is kind of a vague bug at this point, but here's what I > know: with gcj-3.2 installed, babel compiles and runs just fine; with > gcj-3.3, it compiles but fails at runtime using kaffe. > > Here's the runtime error: > > /usr/bin/java -addclasspath > /home/hazelsct/babel-0.8.4/lib/babel-0.8.4.jar:/usr/share/java/gnu.getopt.jar:/usr/share/java/xerces.jar > gov.llnl.babel.CommandLineDriver --suppress-timestamp --generate-sidl-stdlib > --vpath=. sidl.sidl > Babel: Parsing URL > "file:/home/hazelsct/babel-0.8.4/runtime/sidl/sidl.sidl"... > Babel: Error: when trying to resolve remaining args... > Babel: java.io.IOException when parsing URL "sidl.sidl"... > null > > This can be duplicated with "apt-get source babel; cd babel-0.8.4 && > dpkg-buildpackage -rfakeroot". That should fail with the above error > showing after "/bin/sh ../../bin/babel "; going to that > directory and running ../../bin/babel with those arguments and --verbose > will result in the above output. > > As mentioned, babel compiled with gcj-3.2 runs this fine, making me > think this is a gcj bug. But it could be a problem related to the > voluminous compile-time warnings... Either way, I would appreciate your > help getting babel and gcj-3.3 to work together, wherever the real > problem is. > > Thank you, > -- > -Adam P. > > GPG fingerprint: D54D 1AEE B11C CE9B A02B C5DD 526F 01E8 564E E4B6 > > Welcome to the best software in the world today cafe! > http://lyre.mit.edu/~powell/The_Best_Stuff_In_The_World_Today_Cafe.ogg > > -- System Information > Debian Release: testing/unstable > Kernel Version: Linux ozymandias 2.4.20-2-k7-smp #1 SMP Fri Jun 6 > 01:07:18 EST 2003 i686 GNU/Linux > > Versions of the packages gcj-3.3 depends on: > ii gcc-3.33.3-3 The GNU C compiler > ii gcc-3.3-base 3.3-3 The GNU Compiler Collection (base > package) > ii java-common0.20 Base of all Java packages > ii libc6 2.3.1-17 GNU C Library: Shared libraries and > Timezone > ii libgcc13.3-3 GCC support library > ii libgcj43.3-3 Java runtime library for use with gcj > ii libgcj4-dev3.3-3 Java development headers and static > library > ii zlib1g 1.1.4-12 compression library - runtime > > > > -- > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Processed: gcc: submitted Debian report #197099 to gcc-gnats as PR 11183
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > # submitted Debian report #197099 to gcc-gnats as PR 11183 > # http://gcc.gnu.org/PR11183 > forwarded 197099 http://gcc.gnu.org/PR11183 Bug#197099: [3.3 arm regression] internal compiler error: in change_address_1, at emit-rtl.c:2017 Noted your statement that Bug has been forwarded to http://gcc.gnu.org/PR11183. > retitle 197099 [PR 11183] [3.3/3.4 regression] [arm] ICE in change_address_1 > (3.3) / subreg_hard_regno (3.4) Bug#197099: [3.3 arm regression] internal compiler error: in change_address_1, at emit-rtl.c:2017 Changed Bug title. > tags 197099 + upstream Bug#197099: [PR 11183] [3.3/3.4 regression] [arm] ICE in change_address_1 (3.3) / subreg_hard_regno (3.4) There were no tags set. Tags added: upstream > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database)
Re: xfree86 compilation / gcc-3.3 strict aliasing
Matthias Klose <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Looking at the build logs you'll see many warnings: > > dereferencing type-punned pointer will break strict-aliasing rules > > Is it safe to ignore these warnings? Please could you try to compile > using -O2 -fno-strict-aliasing to see if this is related to the recent > miscompilation using gcc-3.3? I did, it's not. -- James
Processed: Re: Bug#196380: libstdc++5-3.3-doc: lower_bound is not well documented
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > retitle 196380 [fixed in 3.4] libstdc++5-3.3-doc: lower_bound is not well > documented Bug#196380: libstdc++5-3.3-doc: lower_bound is not well documented Changed Bug title. > forwarded 196380 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Bug#196380: [fixed in 3.4] libstdc++5-3.3-doc: lower_bound is not well documented Noted your statement that Bug has been forwarded to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > tags 196380 + upstream Bug#196380: [fixed in 3.4] libstdc++5-3.3-doc: lower_bound is not well documented There were no tags set. Tags added: upstream > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database)
Processed: Re: Bug#196381: libstdc++5-3.3-doc: "Main Page" is a bad title
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > severity 196381 wishlist Bug#196381: libstdc++5-3.3-doc: "Main Page" is a bad title Severity set to `wishlist'. > forwarded 196381 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Bug#196381: libstdc++5-3.3-doc: "Main Page" is a bad title Noted your statement that Bug has been forwarded to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > tags 196381 + upstream Bug#196381: libstdc++5-3.3-doc: "Main Page" is a bad title There were no tags set. Tags added: upstream > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database)
Bug#189466: marked as done (Fully qualified name with arch desirable)
Your message dated Fri, 13 Jun 2003 11:51:42 +0200 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Processed: Fixed in NMU of gcc-3.2 1:3.2.3ds9-4 has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact me immediately.) Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 18 Apr 2003 02:09:51 + >From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thu Apr 17 21:09:50 2003 Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Received: from ausmtp02.au.ibm.com [202.135.136.105] by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 1 (Debian)) id 196LK1-0007rV-00; Thu, 17 Apr 2003 21:09:50 -0500 Received: from d23rh901.au.ibm.com (d23rh901.au.ibm.com [9.185.167.100]) by ausmtp02.au.ibm.com (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h3I29mil440400; Fri, 18 Apr 2003 12:09:48 +1000 Received: from ozlabs.au.ibm.com (ozlabs.au.ibm.com [9.190.163.12]) by d23rh901.au.ibm.com (8.12.8/NCO/VER6.5) with ESMTP id h3I29jqD030360; Fri, 18 Apr 2003 12:09:46 +1000 Received: from bach (bach.ozlabs.ibm.com [10.61.2.150]) by ozlabs.au.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D37F917DE0; Fri, 18 Apr 2003 12:08:59 +1000 (EST) Received: from prussell by bach with local (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 196LJ8-0007BT-00; Fri, 18 Apr 2003 12:08:54 +1000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Paul Russell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Debian Bug Tracking System <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Fully qualified name with arch desirable X-Mailer: reportbug 2.10.1 Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2003 04:08:54 +0200 Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sender: Paul Russell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.2 required=4.0 tests=HAS_PACKAGE,SPAM_PHRASE_00_01 version=2.44 X-Spam-Level: Package: gcc-3.2 Version: 1:3.2.3-0pre9 Severity: wishlist Hi, It'd be nice to have an i386-linux-gcc-3.2 symlink created (obviously substitute i386 as appropriate for other archs). This helps enormously when using distcc across different architectures: you want to ensure that the distccd machines uses the same arch and compiler versions. Thankyou, The distcc Debian Maintainer. -- System Information: Debian Release: testing/unstable Architecture: i386 Kernel: Linux bach 2.4.19-pre8 #1 Wed May 8 15:38:14 EST 2002 i686 Locale: LANG=C, LC_CTYPE=C Versions of packages gcc-3.2 depends on: ii binutils2.13.90.0.18-1.7 The GNU assembler, linker and bina ii cpp-3.2 1:3.2.3-0pre9The GNU C preprocessor ii gcc-3.2-base1:3.2.3-0pre9The GNU Compiler Collection (base ii libc6 2.3.1-16 GNU C Library: Shared libraries an ii libgcc1 1:3.3-0pre4 GCC support library -- no debconf information --- Received: (at 189466-done) by bugs.debian.org; 13 Jun 2003 09:56:09 + >From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Jun 13 04:56:08 2003 Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Received: from mail.cs.tu-berlin.de [130.149.17.13] by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian)) id 19QlI0-0005eg-00; Fri, 13 Jun 2003 04:56:08 -0500 Received: from bolero.cs.tu-berlin.de ([EMAIL PROTECTED] [130.149.19.1]) by mail.cs.tu-berlin.de (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA23280 for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Fri, 13 Jun 2003 11:51:42 +0200 (MET DST) Received: (from [EMAIL PROTECTED]) by bolero.cs.tu-berlin.de (8.11.6+Sun/8.9.3) id h5D9pgD10963; Fri, 13 Jun 2003 11:51:42 +0200 (MEST) From: Matthias Klose <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2003 11:51:42 +0200 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Processed: Fixed in NMU of gcc-3.2 1:3.2.3ds9-4 In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> X-Mailer: VM 7.03 under 21.4 (patch 6) "Common Lisp" XEmacs Lucid Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-18.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_01,EMAIL_ATTRIBUTION,IN_REP_TO,REFERENCES, REPLY_WITH_QUOTES,USER_AGENT_VM autolearn=ham version=2.53-bugs.debian.org_2003_06_10 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.53-bugs.debian.org_2003_06_10 (1.174.2.15-2003-03-30-exp) Debian Bug Tracking System writes: > Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > > > tag 189466 + fixed > Bug#189466: Fully qualified name with arch desirable > There were no tags set. > Tags added: fixed closi
Bug#195353: marked as done (java.net.SocketException: SO_REUSEADDR: not valid for TCP)
Your message dated Fri, 13 Jun 2003 12:21:53 +0200 with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and subject line Bug#195353: java.net.SocketException: SO_REUSEADDR: not valid for TCP has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done. This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact me immediately.) Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 30 May 2003 04:33:31 + >From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thu May 29 23:33:30 2003 Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Received: from 12-238-57-17.client.attbi.com (yakko.doogie.org) [12.238.57.17] by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian)) id 19Lba6-0008Gv-00; Thu, 29 May 2003 23:33:30 -0500 Received: from localhost [127.0.0.1] (uucp) by yakko.doogie.org with esmtp (Exim 3.36 1 (Debian)) id 19Lba5-0005CE-00; Thu, 29 May 2003 23:33:29 -0500 Date: Thu, 29 May 2003 23:33:29 -0500 (CDT) From: Adam Heath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> X-X-Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: java.net.SocketException: SO_REUSEADDR: not valid for TCP Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-11.7 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_01,HAS_PACKAGE,USER_AGENT_PINE autolearn=ham version=2.53-bugs.debian.org_2003_05_24 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.53-bugs.debian.org_2003_05_24 (1.174.2.15-2003-03-30-exp) package: libgcj4 version: 1:3.3-2 java.net.SocketException: SO_REUSEADDR: not valid for TCP at java.net.PlainSocketImpl.setOption(int, java.lang.Object) (/usr/lib/libgcj.so.4.0.0) at java.net.ServerSocket.setReuseAddress(boolean) (/usr/lib/libgcj.so.4.0.0) at org.doogie.net.SuperServer.processServerSocket(java.net.InetSocketAddress, org.doogie.net.SuperServer$ServerSocketAdapter) (Unknown Source) at org.doogie.net.SuperServer.register(int, org.doogie.net.SuperServer$ServerSocketAdapter) (Unknown Source) at org.doogie.net.http.Server.main(java.lang.String[]) (Unknown Source) It is perfectly fine to set that option for a tcp socket. Setting it for udp makes no sense. --- Received: (at 195353-done) by bugs.debian.org; 13 Jun 2003 10:26:12 + >From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Jun 13 05:26:11 2003 Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Received: from mail.cs.tu-berlin.de [130.149.17.13] by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian)) id 19Qll5-0004zy-00; Fri, 13 Jun 2003 05:26:11 -0500 Received: from bolero.cs.tu-berlin.de ([EMAIL PROTECTED] [130.149.19.1]) by mail.cs.tu-berlin.de (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA28302 for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Fri, 13 Jun 2003 12:21:54 +0200 (MET DST) Received: (from [EMAIL PROTECTED]) by bolero.cs.tu-berlin.de (8.11.6+Sun/8.9.3) id h5DALsi18726; Fri, 13 Jun 2003 12:21:54 +0200 (MEST) From: Matthias Klose <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2003 12:21:53 +0200 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Bug#195353: java.net.SocketException: SO_REUSEADDR: not valid for TCP In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> X-Mailer: VM 7.03 under 21.4 (patch 6) "Common Lisp" XEmacs Lucid Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-20.2 required=4.0 tests=EMAIL_ATTRIBUTION,IN_REP_TO,QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT,REFERENCES, REPLY_WITH_QUOTES,USER_AGENT_VM autolearn=ham version=2.53-bugs.debian.org_2003_06_10 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.53-bugs.debian.org_2003_06_10 (1.174.2.15-2003-03-30-exp) Martin v. =?iso-8859-15?q?L=F6wis?= writes: > Adam Heath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > java.net.SocketException: SO_REUSEADDR: not valid for TCP > [...] > > It is perfectly fine to set that option for a tcp socket. Setting it for > > udp makes no sense. > > Hmm. > http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.4.1/docs/api/java/net/SocketOptions.html#SO_REUSEADDR > says > > Sets SO_REUSEADDR for a socket. This is used only for MulticastSockets > in java, and it is set by default for MulticastSockets. > > Valid for: DatagramSocketImpl Closing the report.
[Bug target/11052] [3.3 regression] [arm] noce_process_if_block() can loose REG_INC notes
PLEASE REPLY TO [EMAIL PROTECTED] ONLY, *NOT* [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11052 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2003-06-13 10:56 --- *** Bug 10287 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You reported the bug, or are watching the reporter.
Bug#67206: [Bug optimization/6901] optimiser could be improved
PLEASE REPLY TO [EMAIL PROTECTED] ONLY, *NOT* [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=6901 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2003-06-13 11:04 --- Case 1 is fixed. Case 2 is still present in gcc 3.3 and is identical as before. Case 3 is gone as gcc 3.3 optimises it differently. --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You reported the bug, or are watching the reporter.
Bug#166940: [Bug target/10984] x86/sse2 ICEs on vector intrinsics
PLEASE REPLY TO [EMAIL PROTECTED] ONLY, *NOT* [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10984 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added GCC target triplet||i?86-*-* --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
Bug#187564: [Bug target/10692] [3.3/3.4 regression] [m68k] miscompilation of perl with -O2 -fPIC
PLEASE REPLY TO [EMAIL PROTECTED] ONLY, *NOT* [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10692 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added GCC target triplet||m68k-linux --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You reported the bug, or are watching the reporter.
Bug#161432: [Bug target/8603] [Alpha] s?addl pattern doesn't work
PLEASE REPLY TO [EMAIL PROTECTED] ONLY, *NOT* [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=8603 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added GCC target triplet||alpha-linux --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You reported the bug, or are watching the reporter.
Bug#192634: [Bug target/10730] [3.3 regression] [arm] -O2 generates invalid asm
PLEASE REPLY TO [EMAIL PROTECTED] ONLY, *NOT* [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10730 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added GCC target triplet||arm-linux --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You reported the bug, or are watching the reporter.
Bug#166255: [Bug target/8606] GNAT floating point optimization bug
PLEASE REPLY TO [EMAIL PROTECTED] ONLY, *NOT* [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=8606 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added GCC target triplet||i386-linux --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You reported the bug, or are watching the reporter.
Bug#197090: gcj-3.3: babel fails with 3.3, works with 3.2...
> "Matthias" == Matthias Klose <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Matthias> This report is very vague. Should it be submitted to bugzilla anyway? Could you get more info first? Ideally the reporter could find out exactly what goes wrong. Tom
Bug#67206: [Bug optimization/6901] optimiser could be improved (removing unused local variables)
PLEASE REPLY TO [EMAIL PROTECTED] ONLY, *NOT* [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=6901 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|optimiser could be improved |optimiser could be improved ||(removing unused local ||variables) --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You reported the bug, or are watching the reporter.
Bug#166255: [Bug target/8606] GNAT floating point optimization bug
PLEASE REPLY TO [EMAIL PROTECTED] ONLY, *NOT* [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=8606 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution||INVALID --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2003-06-13 14:31 --- As described earlier, varying accuracy on x86 depending on optimization is not a bug. A lot has been written about this over the years. Search the archives if you're interested. There is nothing to fix here. --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You reported the bug, or are watching the reporter.
Bug#186185: [Bug target/10206] [3.3/3.4 regression][arm] ICE in emit-rtl.c:change_address_1 when compiling fftw
PLEASE REPLY TO [EMAIL PROTECTED] ONLY, *NOT* [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10206 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added GCC target triplet||arm-pc-linux-gnu --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You reported the bug, or are watching the reporter.
Results for 3.2.3 (Debian) testsuite on m68k-unknown-linux-gnu
LAST_UPDATED: Native configuration is m68k-unknown-linux-gnu === g++ tests === Running target unix FAIL: g++.eh/spec3.C Execution test FAIL: g++.eh/spec4.C Execution test XPASS: g++.other/init5.C Execution test === g++ Summary === # of expected passes7347 # of unexpected failures2 # of unexpected successes 1 # of expected failures 88 # of untested testcases 23 # of unsupported tests 6 /build/schmitz/gcc-3.2-3.2.3ds9/build/gcc/testsuite/../g++ version 3.2.3 (Debian) === gcc tests === Running target unix WARNING: program timed out. FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/20001226-1.c, -O1 WARNING: program timed out. FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/20001226-1.c, -O2 WARNING: program timed out. FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/20001226-1.c, -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer WARNING: program timed out. FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/20001226-1.c, -O3 -g WARNING: program timed out. FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/20001226-1.c, -Os FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20010122-1.c execution, -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20010122-1.c execution, -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -funroll-loops FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20010122-1.c execution, -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -funroll-all-loops -finline-functions FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20020418-1.c execution, -O2 FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20020418-1.c execution, -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20020418-1.c execution, -O3 -g FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/20020418-1.c execution, -Os FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/loop-2e.c execution, -O0 FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/loop-2e.c execution, -O1 FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/loop-2e.c execution, -O2 FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/loop-2e.c execution, -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/loop-2e.c execution, -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -funroll-loops FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/loop-2e.c execution, -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -funroll-all-loops -finline-functions FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/loop-2e.c execution, -O3 -g FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/loop-2e.c execution, -Os FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/loop-2f.c execution, -O0 FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/loop-2f.c execution, -O1 FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/loop-2f.c execution, -O2 FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/loop-2f.c execution, -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/loop-2f.c execution, -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -funroll-loops FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/loop-2f.c execution, -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -funroll-all-loops -finline-functions FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/loop-2f.c execution, -O3 -g FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/loop-2f.c execution, -Os FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/loop-2g.c execution, -O0 FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/loop-2g.c execution, -O1 FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/loop-2g.c execution, -O2 FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/loop-2g.c execution, -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/loop-2g.c execution, -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -funroll-loops FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/loop-2g.c execution, -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -funroll-all-loops -finline-functions FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/loop-2g.c execution, -O3 -g FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/loop-2g.c execution, -Os FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/string-opt-10.c execution, -O0 FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/string-opt-9.c execution, -O0 FAIL: gcc.dg/20020304-1.c (test for excess errors) FAIL: gcc.dg/20020312-2.c (test for excess errors) WARNING: gcc.dg/20020312-2.c compilation failed to produce executable FAIL: gcc.dg/bitfld-3.c execution test FAIL: gcc.dg/pack-test-1.c (test for excess errors) FAIL: gcc.dg/typeof-2.c scan-assembler baz3.*baz3.*baz3.*baz3.*baz3.*baz3 === gcc Summary === # of expected passes18804 # of unexpected failures43 # of expected failures 66 # of unsupported tests 128 /build/schmitz/gcc-3.2-3.2.3ds9/build/gcc/xgcc version 3.2.3 (Debian) === objc tests === Running target unix === objc Summary === # of expected passes1035 # of expected failures 6 /build/schmitz/gcc-3.2-3.2.3ds9/build/gcc/xgcc version 3.2.3 (Debian) === libstdc++-v3 tests === Running target unix XPASS: 22_locale/collate_byname.cc execution test XPASS: 22_locale/collate_members_char.cc execution test XPASS: 22_locale/collate_members_wchar_t.cc execution test XPASS: 22_locale/ctype_is_char.cc execution test XPASS: 22_locale/ctype_is_wchar_t.cc execution test XPASS: 22_locale/members.cc execution test XPASS: 22_locale/messages_byname.cc execution test XPASS: 22_locale/messages_members_char.cc execution test XPASS: 22_locale/moneypunct_byname.cc execution test XPASS: 22_locale/moneypunct_members_char.cc execution test XPASS: 22_locale/moneypunct_members_wchar_t.cc execution test XPASS: 22_locale/numpunct_byname.cc execution test XPASS: 22_locale/numpunct_members_char.cc execution test XPASS: 22_locale/numpunct
Bug#67206: [Bug optimization/9363] unused struct literal constants remain
PLEASE REPLY TO [EMAIL PROTECTED] ONLY, *NOT* [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9363 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
Bug#67206: [Bug optimization/6901] optimiser could be improved (removing unused local variables)
PLEASE REPLY TO [EMAIL PROTECTED] ONLY, *NOT* [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=6901 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added BugsThisDependsOn||9363 Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2003-06-13 23:40 --- Okay closing as fixed as bug 9363 is the bug for unused structs. --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You reported the bug, or are watching the reporter.
