Nenad Vukicevic writes:
> Has anybody tried to build 4.7 on Ubuntu 11.10 system. I am getting the
> following linking problem (no special configure switches):
>
> /usr/bin/ld: cannot find crt1.o: No such file or directory
> /usr/bin/ld: cannot find crti.o: No such file or directory
> /usr/bin/ld:
Has anybody tried to build 4.7 on Ubuntu 11.10 system. I am getting the
following linking problem (no special configure switches):
/usr/bin/ld: cannot find crt1.o: No such file or directory
/usr/bin/ld: cannot find crti.o: No such file or directory
/usr/bin/ld: cannot find -lgcc
/usr/bin/ld: cann
On 02/08/2012 06:19 PM, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
This news item on the main page is quite long if you compare it with
the others and probably fills most of that column on page 1; could you
cut this signficantly and instead link to the gcc-4.7/changes.html and
have
some of the good general backg
Hi Andrew,
On Wed, 8 Feb 2012, Andrew MacLeod wrote:
OK, hows this look? I added a link in the news as well.
Index: index.html
===
+ Atomic memory model support
+ [2011-11-06]
+ C++11/C11 http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/Atomic/GCCMM"
On 8 February 2012 21:49, Andrew MacLeod wrote:
> That's what I get for following the same pattern as those TM jokers.
Heh :)
> OK, hows this look? I added a link in the news as well.
Looks great to me.
On 02/08/2012 04:30 PM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
On 08/02/2012, Andrew MacLeod wrote:
On 02/08/2012 04:59 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
Should they be?
How's this look for a news item and the changes file? Formatting seems
fine.
The news item is missing a + in C++
It's not critical for the cha
On 08/02/2012, Andrew MacLeod wrote:
> On 02/08/2012 04:59 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>> Should they be?
> How's this look for a news item and the changes file? Formatting seems
> fine.
The news item is missing a + in C++
It's not critical for the changes.html page since it's not likely to
be p
On 02/08/2012 04:59 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
Should they be?
How's this look for a news item and the changes file? Formatting seems
fine.
Is there no changelog for docs?
Andrew
Index: index.html
===
RCS file: /cvs/gcc/wwwdoc
On 02/07/2012 07:42 PM, Henderson, Stuart wrote:
> Hi,
> I'm investigating the following ICE building the Blackfin compiler from trunk:
> /home/shender/gnu-upstream/toolchain/gcc-4.7/libgfortran/generated/eoshift1_4.c:
> In function ÃâËeoshift1Ãââ:
> /home/shender/gnu-upstream/toolchain/gcc-4.7/li
On 02/08/2012 10:38 AM, Andrew MacLeod wrote:
OSure. There are 2 benefits for c++ now
- We can compile atomic objects of any arbitrary size/type now.
Previously there was a compiler error if it was not an integer class
that mapped to a supported size of lock-free __sync call. Now a user
On 02/08/2012 10:23 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
On 8 February 2012 13:06, Andrew MacLeod wrote:
Yes, I meant to do that last week, but instead it's this week :-P Gerald
had pinged me about it a while ago.
Great, thanks - I was thinking about adding a line to the C++11
improvements in the l
On 02/08/2012 10:23 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
On 8 February 2012 13:06, Andrew MacLeod wrote:
On 02/08/2012 05:54 AM, Richard Guenther wrote:
On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 10:59 AM, Jonathan Wakely
wrote:
Should they be?
Yes. Esp. also the deprecation of the __sync builtins.
Yes, I meant to do
On 8 February 2012 13:06, Andrew MacLeod wrote:
> On 02/08/2012 05:54 AM, Richard Guenther wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 10:59 AM, Jonathan Wakely
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Should they be?
>>
>> Yes. Esp. also the deprecation of the __sync builtins.
>
> Yes, I meant to do that last week, but inste
On 02/08/2012 05:54 AM, Richard Guenther wrote:
On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 10:59 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
Should they be?
Yes. Esp. also the deprecation of the __sync builtins.
Yes, I meant to do that last week, but instead it's this week :-P
Gerald had pinged me about it a while ago.
An
On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 10:59 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> Should they be?
Yes. Esp. also the deprecation of the __sync builtins.
Should they be?
16 matches
Mail list logo
