Paolo,
>toplevel:
>2005-12-05 Paolo Bonzini <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> * configure.in (CONFIGURED_BISON, CONFIGURED_YACC,
CONFIGURED_M4,
> CONFIGURED_FLEX, CONFIGURED_LEX, CONFIGURED_MAKEINFO): Remove
> "CONFIGURED_" from the AC_CHECK_PROGS invocation. Move below.
> Find in
On Wed, 7 Dec 2005, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
> As in the previous round, please consider every weekly snapshot from
> gcc-3_4-branch as a release candidate for testing.
>
> Schedule:
>
>The tentative release date is end of February 2006.
>
>I'll make official prerelease tarballs on Februa
On Tue, 6 Dec 2005, Diego Novillo wrote:
> Yes, they're collectively pretty clueless. However, in the midst of
> that /. interchange I did see one posting that made a relatively good
> point: If you go to gcc.gnu.org, you will see "Current release series:
> GCC 4.1.0".
>
> For the uninformed,
Gerald Pfeifer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| On Wed, 7 Dec 2005, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
| > As in the previous round, please consider every weekly snapshot from
| > gcc-3_4-branch as a release candidate for testing.
| >
| > Schedule:
| >
| >The tentative release date is end of February 2006
On Fri, 9 Dec 2005, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
> The branch is open for regression fixes only as I restated in the Dec
> 1st message. Do you have a particular patch in mind that did not fix
> a regression?
Most of Volker's patches didn't state they were regression fixes on the
gcc-patches submission
Gerald Pfeifer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| On Fri, 9 Dec 2005, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
| > The branch is open for regression fixes only as I restated in the Dec
| > 1st message. Do you have a particular patch in mind that did not fix
| > a regression?
|
| Most of Volker's patches didn't state
Hi!
I found a microcontroller-ported gcc. It used for Microchip's dsPIC
products.
http://www.microchip.com/stellent/idcplg?IdcService=SS_GET_PAGE&nodeId=1406&dDocName=en010065&part=SW006012
or
http://www.microchip.com --> Development Tools --> MPLAB® C30 Compiler
It's is a "60 day demo/upgrad
http://www.microchip.com --> Development Tools --> MPLAB® C30 Compiler
It's is a "60 day demo/upgrade" versions GCC, and has no source-code, I
wrote a email for Microchip, but they dont give me the source.
The source code is only a part of full GCC-binary.
Zsolt
Hi!
I found a microcontroller-ported gcc. It used for Microchip's dsPIC products.
http://www.microchip.com/stellent/idcplg?IdcService=SS_GET_PAGE&nodeId=1406&dDocName=en010065&part=SW006012
or
http://www.microchip.com --> Development Tools --> MPLABÂ C30 Compiler
It's is a "60 day demo/upgrad
On Fri, Dec 09, 2005 at 03:31:34PM +0100, Krüpl Zsolt wrote:
> >http://www.microchip.com --> Development Tools --> MPLAB® C30 Compiler
> >
> >It's is a "60 day demo/upgrade" versions GCC, and has no source-code, I
> >wrote a email for Microchip, but they dont give me the source.
>
> The source co
The SC has approved Aldy's nomination of Nathan as a co-maintainer for
the Morpho Technologies port.
Nathan, please updated MAINTAINERS.
Thanks,
--
Mark Mitchell
CodeSourcery, LLC
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(916) 791-8304
On Tue, 6 Dec 2005, David Daney wrote:
> After the 4.1 branch was created there appears to be no way to navigate to:
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-4.1/changes.html
>
> from the gcc.gnu.org home page.
Now there is. ;-)
Thanks for the hint; I just installed the patch below.
Gerald
Index: index.h
Snapshot gcc-4.1-20051209 is now available on
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/4.1-20051209/
and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 4.1 SVN branch
with the following options: svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/branches
On Thu, 8 Dec 2005, Paul Martinolich wrote:
> I have noticed that when I search the mailing lists the earliest
> messages
> are from May 2005. I don't see anything before that.
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/
>
> Search 'fortran' which shows the first message is:
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2005-
On 2005-12-10, Hans-Peter Nilsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, 8 Dec 2005, Paul Martinolich wrote:
>> I have noticed that when I search the mailing lists the earliest
>> messages are from May 2005. I don't see anything before that.
>
> If you mean "latest" instead of "earliest", it's becau
I'm looking at a set of reloads that look like this:
(insn 238 3802 239 35 (set (reg/v:HI 175 [ ch ])
(sign_extend:HI (mem:QI (reg/v/f:HI 176 [ fmt ]) [0 S1 A8]))) 46
{extendqihi2} (nil)
(nil))
Note that the md pattern uses a "0" constraint; sign-extend is a
one-op insn.
Reloads fo
Hans-Peter Nilsson-2 wrote:
>
> If you mean "latest" instead of "earliest", it's because the
> search engine has stopped indexing, permanently. No ETA; I'm
> not sure it'll be fixed at all.
>
Try search Nabble, the gcc user list is archived here:
http://www.nabble.com/gcc---General-f1157.ht
DJ Delorie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Reload 0: reload_in (HI) = (plus:HI (reg/f:HI 7 fb)
> (const_int -128))
> A_REGS, RELOAD_OTHER (opnum = 0)
> reload_in_reg: (plus:HI (reg/f:HI 7 fb)
> (const_int -128))
>
18 matches
Mail list logo
