Snapshot gcc-5-20170516 is now available on
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/5-20170516/
and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 5 SVN branch
with the following options: svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/branches/gcc-5
Sorry for not getting back to your original post Paolo. I haven't been
picking up mails for a while.
On 2017-05-01 16:56, Jason Merrill wrote:
On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 2:02 PM, Paolo Carlini
wrote:
On 26/04/2017 12:32, Paolo Carlini wrote:
in 2013 (2013-09-16) Adam added two slightly obscur
On Mon, 2017-05-15 at 15:36 +0200, Martin Liška wrote:
> Hi.
>
> I sent this email to David some time ago, but it should be probably
> answered
> on gcc mailing list.
> I have idea one to improve gcov tool and I'm interested in more
> precise locations for gimple
> statements. For gcov purpose, w
On May 16, 2017, at 5:16 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> The change I care about in 1.5.3
So, we haven't talked much about the version people want most. If we update,
might as well get something that more people care about. 1.5.3 is in ubuntu
LTS 16.04 and Fedora 24, so it's been around awhile.
On 05/16/2017 12:37 PM, Will Hawkins wrote:
> On Tue, May 16, 2017 at 2:33 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
>> On 05/16/2017 12:24 PM, Will Hawkins wrote:
>>> Hello everyone!
>>>
>>> I apologize if this is not the right venue to ask this question and/or
>>> this is a waste of your time.
>>>
>>> I was just wond
On Tue, May 16, 2017 at 2:45 PM, David Malcolm wrote:
> On Tue, 2017-05-16 at 14:24 -0400, Will Hawkins wrote:
>> Hello everyone!
>>
>> I apologize if this is not the right venue to ask this question
>> and/or
>> this is a waste of your time.
>>
>> I was just wondering if there are statistics that
On Tue, 2017-05-16 at 14:24 -0400, Will Hawkins wrote:
> Hello everyone!
>
> I apologize if this is not the right venue to ask this question
> and/or
> this is a waste of your time.
>
> I was just wondering if there are statistics that gcc can emit that
> includes either a) the average number of
On Tue, May 16, 2017 at 2:33 PM, Jeff Law wrote:
> On 05/16/2017 12:24 PM, Will Hawkins wrote:
>> Hello everyone!
>>
>> I apologize if this is not the right venue to ask this question and/or
>> this is a waste of your time.
>>
>> I was just wondering if there are statistics that gcc can emit that
On 16.05.2017 05:35, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer wrote:
> On 16 May 2017 at 14:16, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>> On 16 May 2017 at 13:13, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer wrote:
>>> 1.5.0 wouldn't buy us anything as the "libdirs" handling is only in 1.5.2
>>> and later.
>>
>> Ah I missed that in the earlier dis
On 05/16/2017 12:24 PM, Will Hawkins wrote:
> Hello everyone!
>
> I apologize if this is not the right venue to ask this question and/or
> this is a waste of your time.
>
> I was just wondering if there are statistics that gcc can emit that
> includes either a) the average number of instructions
Hello everyone!
I apologize if this is not the right venue to ask this question and/or
this is a waste of your time.
I was just wondering if there are statistics that gcc can emit that
includes either a) the average number of instructions per basic block
and/or b) the average size (in bytes) per
On 16 May 2017 at 14:16, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On 16 May 2017 at 13:13, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer wrote:
>> 1.5.0 wouldn't buy us anything as the "libdirs" handling is only in 1.5.2
>> and later.
>
> Ah I missed that in the earlier discussion.
>
> The change I care about in 1.5.3 is
> http://gi
On 16 May 2017 at 13:13, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer wrote:
> 1.5.0 wouldn't buy us anything as the "libdirs" handling is only in 1.5.2 and
> later.
Ah I missed that in the earlier discussion.
The change I care about in 1.5.3 is
http://git.savannah.gnu.org/gitweb/?p=dejagnu.git;a=commit;h=5256bd823
On 16 May 2017 11:54:18 CEST, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>On 13 May 2017 at 11:38, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>> On Sat, May 13, 2017 at 12:24:12PM +0200, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer
>wrote:
>>> I guess neither redhat
>>> (https://access.redhat.com/downloads/content/dejagnu/ redirects to a
>>> login page but t
On 05/15/2017 09:31 PM, Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Martin Liška:
>
>> validate(pfile.target_file.lstrip('b/'),
>> line.target_line_no, line.value)
>
> Violates line length constraint. :)
Yep, fixed in another email in this thread.
>
> My own egrep script also checks for/switch/
On 05/15/2017 10:35 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
> On 05/15/2017 07:55 AM, Martin Liška wrote:
>> Hello.
>>
>> Recently I've been working on bigger changes to dump infrastructure and I
>> had to
>> fix tens of formatting issues reported by check_GNU_style.sh script. The
>> script works
>> quite fine,
On 13 May 2017 at 11:38, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Sat, May 13, 2017 at 12:24:12PM +0200, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer wrote:
>> I guess neither redhat
>> (https://access.redhat.com/downloads/content/dejagnu/ redirects to a
>> login page but there seem to be 1.5.1 packages) nor SuSE did update dejagnu
On 05/15/2017 10:01 PM, David Edelsohn wrote:
Your understanding is correct. GCC never accepts patches for a
specific version / release -- even if it is the current release.
Patches for new features or support must be contributed to the current
development version.
Can't the patches be put on
Hello,
Actually, this port is a survival initiative. I was part of a VMS port
from Alpha to Itanium, which was finally launched... the month Adacore
decided to stop its support.
I had long negociations with Quentin Ochem in France, hoping to get the
Adacore compiler even without support, and
Also I forgot to mention: I would recommend putting your GCC 4.7 based
port on e.g. github so that other people can benefit from it, since putting
this code base in gcc.gnu.org isn't on the table as per David's emails. I
think that would be the best compromise.
Arno
> Ideally, you should create a general copyright assignment to GCC -- a
> "futures" assignment of all patches for GCC. you can select which
> patches to contribute.
>
> If you insist on limiting it, you can specify files. But that always
> runs into the potential problem of files that were omitt
21 matches
Mail list logo
