--- Comment #8 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-10 06:50 ---
(In reply to comment #7)
Hmmm, that's not right, is it? It should be
PROGRAM TST
IMPLICIT NONE
INTEGER :: P(4),I
integer, allocatable :: Q(:)
P = (/2,4,1,3/)
allocate (Q(size(P)))
Q = P
FORALL(I=1:4)
--- Comment #3 from bonzini at gnu dot org 2007-10-10 06:44 ---
forward_propagate_and_simplify only propagates into single-set insns. In
principle there's nothing to forbid working on other insns (it already does it
for forward_propagate_subreg), but it is made harder because df does no
--- Comment #5 from aoliva at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-10 06:31 ---
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-10/msg00538.html
--
aoliva at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #10 from belyshev at depni dot sinp dot msu dot ru 2007-10-10
06:08 ---
This bug is not fixed by r129193
--
belyshev at depni dot sinp dot msu dot ru changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #4 from aoliva at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-10 05:36 ---
This is actually a fallout from __builtin_va_arg_pack(). Patch to follow
shortly.
--
aoliva at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from aoliva at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-10 04:56 ---
I've tried reverting the patches for PR 33572, but this didn't help with this
problem at all. Looking further, I tried the patch for PR 15764 as well, but
the problem remained. I assumed I was Cc:ed because there wa
--- Comment #32 from hjl at lucon dot org 2007-10-10 04:07 ---
Fixed.
--
hjl at lucon dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #17 from ajd at gentrack dot com 2007-10-10 04:04 ---
(In reply to comment #16)
> lib1.a depends on lib2.a
> main depends on lib1.a, but does not explicitly link with lib2.a
main initializes what it is explicitly linked against.
lib1 initializes lib2 before it initializes it
Gcc has STACK_BOUNDARY and PREFERRED_STACK_BOUNDARY. When a stack variable
alignment is greater than PREFERRED_STACK_BOUNDARY, gcc will either crash
or generate codes which won't satisfy alignment requirement for stack
variable.
--
Summary: Gcc can't properly align stack variable
--- Comment #20 from hjl at lucon dot org 2007-10-10 03:47 ---
Subject: Re: [4.3 Regression] Revision 128957
miscompiles 481.wrf
On Tue, Oct 09, 2007 at 11:39:48PM -0400, Kenneth Zadeck wrote:
> HJ,
>
> Sorry about the committing snafu. I should have posted the irc log of
>
--- Comment #3 from danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-10 03:45 ---
The problem appears to be here in pthread_support.c:
# ifdef STACK_GROWS_DOWN
return stack_addr + stack_size;
# else
return stack_addr - stack_size;
# endif
SUSV3 says the stackaddr argument in pt
--- Comment #19 from zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2007-10-10 03:41
---
patch committed to fix this.
--
zadeck at naturalbridge dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #18 from zadeck at naturalbridge dot com 2007-10-10 03:39
---
Subject: Re: [4.3 Regression] Revision 128957
miscompiles 481.wrf
HJ,
Sorry about the committing snafu. I should have posted the irc log of
seonbae's comments to the log for the bug. Also I had a meeting in
--- Comment #17 from zadeck at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-10 03:32 ---
Subject: Bug 33669
Author: zadeck
Date: Wed Oct 10 03:32:43 2007
New Revision: 129193
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=129193
Log:
2007-10-07 Kenneth Zadeck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR mid
--- Comment #16 from dje at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-10 03:17 ---
lib1.a depends on lib2.a
main depends on lib1.a, but does not explicitly link with lib2.a
Your proposed solution requires that the link of main see all dependent
libraries.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.
--- Comment #6 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-10 02:00 ---
Danny, if this allows compilation of parallel_list.cc then please check your
patch in, as it doesn't change semantics.
Then we can figure out what we really want here
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.c
--- Comment #5 from bangerth at dealii dot org 2007-10-10 01:13 ---
I meant to close this one, as it appears fixed.
--
bangerth at dealii dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #4 from bangerth at dealii dot org 2007-10-10 01:12 ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> Wolfgang, I think some of this is fixed, and for the rest (comment #2), there
> is another bug report (33490) that is focused just on that.
>
> Is my understanding correct?
I believe so. In a
--- Comment #2 from bangerth at dealii dot org 2007-10-10 01:07 ---
By the way, here is finally also an example that definitely should
compile due to Koenig lookup:
-
#include
#include
#include
void f () {
std::vector boundary_indicators;
transform (boundary_in
--- Comment #5 from dannysmith at users dot sourceforge dot net 2007-10-09
23:54 ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> Created an attachment (id=14332)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14332&action=view) [edit]
> Consistent use of _WIN32 define
>
Thats not quite right. ___
--- Comment #4 from dannysmith at users dot sourceforge dot net 2007-10-09
23:52 ---
Created an attachment (id=14334)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14334&action=view)
mingw32 compatibility patch
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33578
--- Comment #1 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 23:27 ---
I guess this is from:
http://rted.public.iastate.edu/OpenMP/homepage.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33720
--- Comment #3 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 23:08 ---
Created an attachment (id=14333)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14333&action=view)
EXT to EXT_D
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33633
--- Comment #2 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 23:07 ---
Here's my plan for the legacy hash containers:
1) port debug mode to tr1 associative containers
2) move ext/hash containers to deprecated
Thoughts?
Anyway.
This issue is a macro name mix-up. Here's I'll check in th
--- Comment #3 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 22:41 ---
Actually, I think that when I added sched.h, I forgot to look at the windows
stuff. Something seems off to me, WRT the current code. The includes don't
match the code...
Here's a patch to make the conditionals in the
--- Comment #2 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 22:38 ---
Created an attachment (id=14332)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14332&action=view)
Consistent use of _WIN32 define
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33578
--- Comment #1 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 22:24 ---
Ah yes, this one.
I believe there is controversy around this implementation point on linux as
well.
Here's some info from previous discussions between myself, Ulrich, and
Johannes.
Me:
Include for sched_yield in .
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 22:22 ---
This code is invalid, and we should reject both of them.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33677
--- Comment #8 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 22:06 ---
> We'll probably need to roll our own tgamma function: To
> cover cases like this, where the system doesn't provide
> one, and to get numerically better answers.
g95 uses a C version of W. J. Cody and L. Stoltz' For
--- Comment #13 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 21:51 ---
Subject: Bug 33485
Author: bkoz
Date: Tue Oct 9 21:51:06 2007
New Revision: 129182
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=129182
Log:
2007-10-09 Wolfgang Bangerth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR lib
--- Comment #15 from ajd at gentrack dot com 2007-10-09 21:44 ---
(In reply to comment #14)
> You seem to want to have the main program run the share library constructors.
> That's a no-no. And decide at link-time. Double no-no.
Do you mind explaining a situation that won't work beca
--- Comment #10 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 21:40 ---
Mine.
--
bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at g
--- Comment #4 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 21:24 ---
Subject: Bug 33682
Author: bkoz
Date: Tue Oct 9 21:24:31 2007
New Revision: 129181
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=129181
Log:
2007-10-09 Zhou Drangon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR libstdc++
--- Comment #9 from jason at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 21:11 ---
Fixed for 4.2.3.
--
jason at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASS
--- Comment #12 from jason at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 21:10 ---
Fixed for 4.2.3.
--
jason at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|AS
--- Comment #14 from dje at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 21:10 ---
You seem to want to have the main program run the share library constructors.
That's a no-no. And decide at link-time. Double no-no. You essentially want
to behave like a static link.
If you look at the discussion
--- Comment #3 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 21:01 ---
I'm going to check this in folks.
-benjamin
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33682
--- Comment #11 from jason at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 20:52 ---
Subject: Bug 32470
Author: jason
Date: Tue Oct 9 20:52:24 2007
New Revision: 129180
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=129180
Log:
PR c++/32470
* name-lookup.c (push_namespace_wit
--- Comment #3 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 20:52 ---
Wolfgang, I think some of this is fixed, and for the rest (comment #2), there
is another bug report (33490) that is focused just on that.
Is my understanding correct?
-benjamin
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/sho
--- Comment #8 from jason at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 20:52 ---
Subject: Bug 33094
Author: jason
Date: Tue Oct 9 20:52:24 2007
New Revision: 129180
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=129180
Log:
PR c++/32470
* name-lookup.c (push_namespace_with
--- Comment #9 from bangerth at dealii dot org 2007-10-09 20:51 ---
(In reply to comment #8)
> Wolfgang, please verify and fix if true.
Already under way :-)
W.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33489
--- Comment #1 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 20:51 ---
We've made some progress on this front recently, although this bug is a useful
marker for other documentation improvements.
-benjamin
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33491
--- Comment #8 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 20:50 ---
This should be all fixed now.
Wolfgang, please verify and fix if true.
-benjamin
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33489
--- Comment #7 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 20:48 ---
Subject: Bug 33489
Author: bkoz
Date: Tue Oct 9 20:48:38 2007
New Revision: 129179
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=129179
Log:
2007-10-09 Benjamin Kosnik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR libstd
The 'num_threads' clause in a OpenMP pragma is not being checked to see if it
is a positive integer. An error should be return if it is not.
The OpenMP API Version 2.5 May 2005 on p. 28 lines 29-30 offers the following
restriction:
" * ... The num_threads expression must evaluate to a positive i
--- Comment #7 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 20:22 ---
We'll probably need to roll our own tgamma function: To
cover cases like this, where the system doesn't provide
one, and to get numerically better answers.
--
tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
--- Comment #9 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 20:13 ---
Subject: Bug 33683
Author: tkoenig
Date: Tue Oct 9 20:13:18 2007
New Revision: 129174
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=129174
Log:
2007-10-09 Thomas Koenig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR li
This case involves a function containing only a '#pragma omp for' directive and
a 'for' loop to go with it. The invoking routine is the one that determines
whether the variable is shared or private. There is no way to supply this
information within the function without expanding what the function
--- Comment #13 from ajd at gentrack dot com 2007-10-09 20:06 ---
(In reply to comment #9)
> A solution within GCC is very complicated.
Have you looked at the suggested patch?
If you could point out any concerns/faults, I could have another try at it.
XLC has it's own solution implem
--- Comment #6 from fang at csl dot cornell dot edu 2007-10-09 19:44
---
tastes like PR 31947 ?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33195
The GNU C/C++ compiler is asking that when a default(none) clause is present on
the '#pragma omp parallel for', and a chunk-size expression (in this case just
the variable csize) appears in a schedule clause, that the variable must appear
in a shared or private clause. Other compilers do not requi
--- Comment #7 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 19:22
---
Change target milestone to 4.2.3, as 4.2.2 has been released.
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #12 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 19:22
---
Change target milestone to 4.2.3, as 4.2.2 has been released.
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #4 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 19:22
---
Change target milestone to 4.2.3, as 4.2.2 has been released.
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #6 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 19:22
---
Change target milestone to 4.2.3, as 4.2.2 has been released.
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #23 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 19:22
---
Change target milestone to 4.2.3, as 4.2.2 has been released.
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #11 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 19:22
---
Change target milestone to 4.2.3, as 4.2.2 has been released.
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #12 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 19:22
---
Change target milestone to 4.2.3, as 4.2.2 has been released.
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #6 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 19:22
---
Change target milestone to 4.2.3, as 4.2.2 has been released.
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #8 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 19:22
---
Change target milestone to 4.2.3, as 4.2.2 has been released.
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 19:22
---
Change target milestone to 4.2.3, as 4.2.2 has been released.
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #11 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 19:22
---
Change target milestone to 4.2.3, as 4.2.2 has been released.
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #7 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 19:22
---
Change target milestone to 4.2.3, as 4.2.2 has been released.
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #35 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 19:22
---
Change target milestone to 4.2.3, as 4.2.2 has been released.
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #11 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 19:22
---
Change target milestone to 4.2.3, as 4.2.2 has been released.
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #3 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 19:22
---
Change target milestone to 4.2.3, as 4.2.2 has been released.
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #49 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 19:22
---
Change target milestone to 4.2.3, as 4.2.2 has been released.
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #4 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 19:22
---
Change target milestone to 4.2.3, as 4.2.2 has been released.
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #4 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 19:22
---
Change target milestone to 4.2.3, as 4.2.2 has been released.
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #10 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 19:22
---
Change target milestone to 4.2.3, as 4.2.2 has been released.
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #3 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 19:22
---
Change target milestone to 4.2.3, as 4.2.2 has been released.
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #9 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 19:22
---
Change target milestone to 4.2.3, as 4.2.2 has been released.
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #12 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 19:22
---
Change target milestone to 4.2.3, as 4.2.2 has been released.
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #7 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 19:22
---
Change target milestone to 4.2.3, as 4.2.2 has been released.
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 19:22
---
Change target milestone to 4.2.3, as 4.2.2 has been released.
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 19:22
---
Change target milestone to 4.2.3, as 4.2.2 has been released.
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #10 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 19:22
---
Change target milestone to 4.2.3, as 4.2.2 has been released.
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #5 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 19:22
---
Change target milestone to 4.2.3, as 4.2.2 has been released.
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #20 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 19:22
---
Change target milestone to 4.2.3, as 4.2.2 has been released.
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #6 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 19:21
---
Change target milestone to 4.2.3, as 4.2.2 has been released.
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #6 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 19:21
---
Change target milestone to 4.2.3, as 4.2.2 has been released.
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 19:21
---
Change target milestone to 4.2.3, as 4.2.2 has been released.
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #12 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 19:21
---
Change target milestone to 4.2.3, as 4.2.2 has been released.
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #14 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 19:21
---
Change target milestone to 4.2.3, as 4.2.2 has been released.
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #8 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 19:21
---
Change target milestone to 4.2.3, as 4.2.2 has been released.
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 19:21
---
Change target milestone to 4.2.3, as 4.2.2 has been released.
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #11 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 19:21
---
Change target milestone to 4.2.3, as 4.2.2 has been released.
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #1 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 19:21
---
Change target milestone to 4.2.3, as 4.2.2 has been released.
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #18 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 19:21
---
Change target milestone to 4.2.3, as 4.2.2 has been released.
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #14 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 19:21
---
Change target milestone to 4.2.3, as 4.2.2 has been released.
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #7 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 19:21
---
Change target milestone to 4.2.3, as 4.2.2 has been released.
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 19:21
---
Change target milestone to 4.2.3, as 4.2.2 has been released.
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #9 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 19:21
---
Change target milestone to 4.2.3, as 4.2.2 has been released.
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 19:21
---
Change target milestone to 4.2.3, as 4.2.2 has been released.
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #18 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 19:21
---
Change target milestone to 4.2.3, as 4.2.2 has been released.
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #6 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 19:21
---
Change target milestone to 4.2.3, as 4.2.2 has been released.
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #20 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 19:21
---
Change target milestone to 4.2.3, as 4.2.2 has been released.
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #42 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 19:21
---
Change target milestone to 4.2.3, as 4.2.2 has been released.
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #50 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 19:21
---
Change target milestone to 4.2.3, as 4.2.2 has been released.
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #9 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-09 19:21
---
Change target milestone to 4.2.3, as 4.2.2 has been released.
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
1 - 100 of 205 matches
Mail list logo
