Hi,
I have provided a backtrace and a preprocessed file in
PR49344.
Dominique
Hello,
>
> Can you provide a backtrace and open a bugreport?
Sure, will do that. (I deleted the bootstrap dir so I can not provide
that info immediately though)
Thanks,
Revital
On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 2:01 PM, Revital Eres wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I get the following bootstrap failure on ppc64-redhat-linux with trunk
> -r174840
> compiling with -O2 flag..
Can you provide a backtrace and open a bugreport?
Richard.
> Thanks,
> Revital
>
>
> /bin/sh ../../libtool --tag=CC -
Hello,
I get the following bootstrap failure on ppc64-redhat-linux with trunk -r174840
compiling with -O2 flag..
Thanks,
Revital
/bin/sh ../../libtool --tag=CC --mode=compile
/home/eres/mainline/build/./gcc/xgcc
-B/home/eres/mainline/build/./gcc/
-B/home/eres/mainline/build/powerpc64-unknown-
> The file was forgotten in the original commit it was fixed by the
> following revision:
> r133278 | paolo | 2008-03-16 11:35:44 -0700 (Sun, 16 Mar 2008) | 34 lines
> Changed paths:
>A /trunk/libstdc++-v3/include/std/date_time
I could have sworn my tree was sufficiently up to date. Nonethele
On Mon, Mar 17, 2008 at 12:58 AM, Ben Elliston <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Anyone else seeing this?
The file was forgotten in the original commit it was fixed by the
following revision:
r133278 | paolo | 2008-03-16 11:35:44 -0700 (Sun, 16 Mar 2008) | 34 lines
Changed paths:
A /trunk/libstdc++-
Anyone else seeing this?
libtool: compile: /scratch/bje/bootstrap/./gcc/xgcc -shared-libgcc
-B/scratch/bje/bootstrap/./gcc -nostdinc++
-L/scratch/bje/bootstrap/powerpc-linux/libstdc++-v3/src
-L/scratch/bje/bootstrap/powerpc-linux/libstdc++-v3/src/.libs
-B/usr/local/powerpc-linux/bin/ -B/usr/l
I disbelieve you can get this in C or C++. The fragment above is a
syntax error. AFAIK, all of this is simple laziness in the Ada front
end: generating & is how things were done at the
beginning of time, and it was easier to change this in the gimplifier
than to modify the cod
On Sun, Aug 21, 2005 at 11:32:34PM -0400, Daniel Berlin wrote:
> See PR 23171.
Ok.
> If analyze_expr (or something) actually did that, i'd be a very happy
> man.
> It doesn't, unfortunately.
> Another perfectly reasonable solution would be to force us to not
> generate such crap in the first plac
> And would that be because analyze_expr isn't implemented for Ada?
That doesn't bother me so much, actually (mainly because i don't care
about Ada). It's the fact that it's popping up in C/C++ that does.
>
> > IE if we have something very funky like:
> >
> > static int c;
> > static int d;
>
> Sure. So far I don't see a problem though.
>
>
> > IE if we have something very funky like:
> >
> > static int c;
> > static int d;
> > static struct foo *a = &{&c, &d};
> >
> > (and if you look, andrew found a case where we are producing
> > &, so this is a possibility, AFAICT)
>
> I disbe
On Sat, Aug 20, 2005 at 10:33:21PM -0400, Daniel Berlin wrote:
> > No. How could that possibly be?
> > We can't execute code for static
> > variable initializers, so how can we gimplify?
> What do you mean by this, exactly?
If you turn a static initializer into a code sequence, then it isn't a
s
On Sat, 2005-08-20 at 19:15 -0700, Richard Henderson wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 19, 2005 at 09:34:35PM -0400, Daniel Berlin wrote:
> > But for general IPA working on the cgraph + GIMPLE level, as is what is
> > happening here, I think we really need to do something about static
> > variable initializers
On Fri, Aug 19, 2005 at 09:34:35PM -0400, Daniel Berlin wrote:
> But for general IPA working on the cgraph + GIMPLE level, as is what is
> happening here, I think we really need to do something about static
> variable initializers so they are in GIMPLE.
No. How could that possibly be? We can't e
On Sat, 2005-08-20 at 00:44 +0200, Laurent GUERBY wrote:
> On Sat, 2005-08-20 at 00:36 +0200, Laurent GUERBY wrote:
> > A patch by Andrew Pinski is there:
> >
> > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-07/msg01666.html
> >
> > But review was negative, so it was not commited.
> >
> > Hope this he
On Sat, 2005-08-20 at 00:36 +0200, Laurent GUERBY wrote:
> A patch by Andrew Pinski is there:
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-07/msg01666.html
>
> But review was negative, so it was not commited.
>
> Hope this helps,
>
> Laurent
>
> PS: is there a PR for this one?
Thanks to Andrew
A patch by Andrew Pinski is there:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-07/msg01666.html
But review was negative, so it was not commited.
Hope this helps,
Laurent
PS: is there a PR for this one?
On Fri, 2005-08-19 at 15:16 -0700, Chris Douty wrote:
> Howdy,
>
> My last two attempts to buil
Howdy,
My last two attempts to build mainline on darwin8 have failed with a
bugbox in Ada.
+===GNAT BUG
DETECTED==+
| 4.1.0 20050819 (experimental) (powerpc-apple-darwin8.3.0) GCC
error: |
| tree check: expected class expression, hav
18 matches
Mail list logo
