Bug#133574: gcc: gcc generates incorrect executables if huge static arrays are used

2002-02-12 Thread Martin v. Loewis
Pavel Machek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > In its previous incarnation, bug was hidden by going to new gcc > version... But it looks like it only raised a bar a bit. This is really a bug in your code; you are exceeding a compiler limit, thus the code behaves undefined. There is a bug in the compi

Processed: fixed in 3.0

2002-02-12 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > reassign 128367 g++-2.95 Bug#128367: aspell: trigger internal compiler error on mipsel Bug reassigned from package `aspell' to `g++-2.95'. > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking system adminis

fixed in 3.0

2002-02-12 Thread Ryan Murray
reassign 128367 g++-2.95 thanks This is c++/4234: State-Changed-From-To: open->closed State-Changed-By: lerdsuwa State-Changed-When: Fri Nov 16 23:55:34 2001 Stat

Re: gcc name bug?

2002-02-12 Thread Philip Blundell
On Tue, 2002-02-12 at 22:20, Frederic Tessier wrote: > We are not familiar with the intricate workings of the compiler, > but this must have to do with an alignment problem when the > executable is launched, as the changes typically occur when the > name length is increased by 8 bytes. This is a se

gcc name bug?

2002-02-12 Thread Frederic Tessier
-- System Information --- Debian Release: stable on Pentium III Kernel Version: Linux 2.2.18pre21/2.2.19 gcc version: 2.95.2 - Hi, While trying to optimize some C code for speed, we have enco

Bug#133574: gcc: gcc generates incorrect executables if huge static arrays are used

2002-02-12 Thread Pavel Machek
Package: gcc Version: 2:2.95.4-9 Severity: normal -- System Information Debian Release: testing/unstable Kernel Version: Linux atrey 2.2.20 #4 Tue Nov 6 15:21:30 CET 2001 i586 unknown Versions of the packages gcc depends on: ii cpp2.95.4-9 The GNU C preprocessor. ii cpp-2.95