Greetings Martin,
I won't be applied but it was good to see you at least got some possible
ideas out of
my research from the make parts. Two questions as related to GSoC, in
terms of
long term planning for my work:
1. *Implement something similar to Clang's/-ftime-trace/*is in my view
the mo
On 04/02/2020 23:26, Bill Schmidt wrote:
> On 2/4/20 5:09 PM, Andreas Schwab wrote:
>> On Feb 04 2020, Bill Schmidt wrote:
>>
>>> Hm. If I'm understanding you correctly, this still attempts to create a
>>> new branch:
>>>
>>> wschmidt@marlin:~/newgcc/gcc/config/rs6000$ git push --dry-run
>>> users
On 2/4/20 5:09 PM, Andreas Schwab wrote:
On Feb 04 2020, Bill Schmidt wrote:
Hm. If I'm understanding you correctly, this still attempts to create a
new branch:
wschmidt@marlin:~/newgcc/gcc/config/rs6000$ git push --dry-run
users/wschmidt +wschmidt/builtins:users/wschmidt/builtins
Sorry, tha
On Feb 04 2020, Bill Schmidt wrote:
> Looks fine to me, so lets try the force push:
>
> wschmidt@marlin:~/newgcc/gcc/config/rs6000$ git push --dry-run
> users/wschmidt +wschmidt/builtins
It looks like the leading + on the refspec suppresses matching against
the default push refspec. I think that
On Feb 04 2020, Bill Schmidt wrote:
> Hm. If I'm understanding you correctly, this still attempts to create a
> new branch:
>
> wschmidt@marlin:~/newgcc/gcc/config/rs6000$ git push --dry-run
> users/wschmidt +wschmidt/builtins:users/wschmidt/builtins
Sorry, that needs to be fully qualified, as i
On 2/4/20 4:31 PM, Andreas Schwab wrote:
On Feb 04 2020, Bill Schmidt wrote:
wschmidt@marlin:~/newgcc/gcc/config/rs6000$ git push --dry-run
users/wschmidt +wschmidt/builtins
To git+ssh://gcc.gnu.org/git/gcc.git
* [new branch] wschmidt/builtins -> wschmidt/builtins
Well, that's o
On Feb 04 2020, Bill Schmidt wrote:
> wschmidt@marlin:~/newgcc/gcc/config/rs6000$ git push --dry-run
> users/wschmidt +wschmidt/builtins
> To git+ssh://gcc.gnu.org/git/gcc.git
> * [new branch] wschmidt/builtins -> wschmidt/builtins
>
> Well, that's odd, why is it trying to create a n
On 2/4/20 5:02 PM, Bill Schmidt wrote:
I'm having a little difficulty with my workflow, and I'm hoping
someone can spot the problem.
I have a user branch set up with the contrib/git-add-user-branch.sh
script. Here are the relevant portions of my .git/config:
[remote "users/wschmidt"]
On Tue, Feb 4, 2020 at 2:03 PM Bill Schmidt wrote:
>
> I'm having a little difficulty with my workflow, and I'm hoping someone
> can spot the problem.
>
> I have a user branch set up with the contrib/git-add-user-branch.sh
> script. Here are the relevant portions of my .git/config:
>
> [remote "u
I'm having a little difficulty with my workflow, and I'm hoping someone
can spot the problem.
I have a user branch set up with the contrib/git-add-user-branch.sh
script. Here are the relevant portions of my .git/config:
[remote "users/wschmidt"]
url = git+ssh://wschm...@gcc.gnu.org/g
This affects gcc.gnu.org as well...Expect weekend outages...
--- Begin Message ---
Community,
The sourceware.org server will be transitioning to a new server over
the next 2-4 weeks. The new server will be CentOS 8-based with more
CPU and more RAM.
Please keep this in mind when planning out y
On 04/02/2020 16:45, David Malcolm wrote:
On Tue, 2020-02-04 at 16:26 +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Tue, Feb 04, 2020 at 09:00:37AM -0500, David Malcolm wrote:
gcc/analyzer/ChangeLog:
PR analyzer/93543
* engine.cc
(pod_hash_traits::mark_empty):
Eliminate reinterpret_ca
On Tue, 2020-02-04 at 16:26 +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 04, 2020 at 09:00:37AM -0500, David Malcolm wrote:
> > gcc/analyzer/ChangeLog:
> > PR analyzer/93543
> > * engine.cc
> > (pod_hash_traits::mark_empty):
> > Eliminate reinterpret_cast.
> > (pod_hash_traits::is_empt
On Tue, Feb 04, 2020 at 09:00:37AM -0500, David Malcolm wrote:
> gcc/analyzer/ChangeLog:
> PR analyzer/93543
> * engine.cc (pod_hash_traits::mark_empty):
> Eliminate reinterpret_cast.
> (pod_hash_traits::is_empty): Likewise.
This is ok for trunk.
> gcc/analyzer/engine.cc
On Tue, 2020-02-04 at 14:53 +0100, Sebastian Huber wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I tried to build a recent GCC master on FreeBSD 12.1 and it failed
> with
> a compile error:
>
> $ clang --version
> FreeBSD clang version 8.0.1 (tags/RELEASE_801/final 366581) (based
> on
> LLVM 8.0.1)
> Target: x86_64-unkn
On Tue, Feb 04, 2020 at 02:53:42PM +0100, Sebastian Huber wrote:
> I tried to build a recent GCC master on FreeBSD 12.1 and it failed with a
> compile error:
That is http://gcc.gnu.org/PR93543
Jakub
Hello,
I tried to build a recent GCC master on FreeBSD 12.1 and it failed with
a compile error:
$ clang --version
FreeBSD clang version 8.0.1 (tags/RELEASE_801/final 366581) (based on
LLVM 8.0.1)
Target: x86_64-unknown-freebsd12.1
Thread model: posix
InstalledDir: /usr/bin
../../gnu-mirror-
On 03/02/2020 18:09, Michael Matz wrote:
But suggesting that using the subject line for tagging is recommended can
lead to subjects like
[PATCH][GCC][Foo][component] Fix foo component bootstrap failure
in an e-mail directed to gcc-patc...@gcc.gnu.org (from somewhen last year,
where Foo/foo wa
18 matches
Mail list logo
