--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-24 05:53 ---
el = toto ? el = parse() : parse2();
IIRC you are using el before it was initialized which is undefined behavior at
runtime so closing as invalid. We cannot error out but could warn about it but
it is hard sometim
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-24 05:51 ---
Fixed.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRM
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-24 05:34 ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> I think this is just some bit missing in our Wunused. We currently do this for
> explicit static, so it shouldn't be hard to do it for the implicit one.
Actually these are not implicitly s
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-24 04:35 ---
Reduced testcase:
class basic_string
{
basic_string(const int __s);
};
namespace MyNS {
class MyClass {
template
T test() { }
};
}
template <>
basic_string MyNS::MyClass::test(){ return 1;}
--
pins
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||error-recovery
Known to work||4.0.1
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||build
Summary|gcc fails to compile with |[4.4 Regression
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-24 04:20 ---
Confirmed.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-24 04:18 ---
Confirmed, caused by:
r108748 | bkoz | 2005-12-18 04:39:23 -0500 (Sun, 18 Dec 2005) | 23 lines
2005-12-18 Benjamin Kosnik
* config/abi/post: New.
* config/abi/*-linux-gnu: Move to..
* con
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-24 04:15 ---
#if defined(_GLIBCXX_SYMVER_GNU) && defined(PIC)
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38092
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-24 04:00 ---
This code is valid and should be accepted. I wonder how many other fixed point
type issues we can find in the C++ front-end.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|paolo dot carlini at oracle |pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot
|dot com
--- Comment #6 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-24 03:45 ---
Why do you think this is invalid code? The C front-end accepts this code.
I have a fix for:
bool b = !1r;
I am working on the fix for the first case.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
Wh
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||4.0.1 4.4.0 4.3.0 4.1.1
|
Testcase:
int t;
void abort (void);
int f(int t, const int *a)
{
const int b[] = { 1, 2, 3};
if (!t)
return f(1, b);
return b == a;
}
int main(void)
{
if (f(0, 0))
abort ();
return 0;
}
-- CUT ---
Originally posted at:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2008-11/msg00201.html
--
S
--- Comment #4 from howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu 2008-12-24
02:53 ---
Zougang,
Considering they just closed the gcc 4.2 branch, the earliest one worth
testing would be gcc 4.3.2.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38274
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot
|
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot
|
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-24 01:47 ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> what 's the version of the gcc src code you tried?
Trunk meaning 4.4.0.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38274
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-24 01:45 ---
Confirmed.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCON
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-24 01:37 ---
fmod should be in libm, do you know if -lm is being included on the link line
or are we linking with gcj?
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-24 01:38 ---
Also this works for me and many other folks, can you try making sure that you
run gcc_update --touch before building the snapshot, it could be that configure
is being marked as older than configure.ac and breaking th
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-24 01:32 ---
By the way, a bootstrap on i686-linux-gnu works without any troubles.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-24 01:31 ---
THis works for me also on the trunk.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-24 01:27 ---
Fixed in 4.3.0 and above which emits at -O2 -Wall -W:
t.cc: In function 'int main(int, char**)':
t.cc:12: warning: array subscript is above array bounds
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-24 01:28 ---
Did you apply any patches?
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot
|
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-24 01:12 ---
Can you provide the preprocessed source?
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #7 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-24 01:09 ---
*** Bug 38356 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-24 01:09 ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 38310 ***
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-24 01:08 ---
Backtrace:
#0 0x0014452c in loop_preheader_edge (loop=0x6680f90) at
/Users/apinski/src/gcc-sony/gcc-4.3/gcc/gcc/basic-block.h:673
#1 0x0039d473 in move_computations_stmt (dw_data=0xb280, bb=0x90f8280) at
/Users
--- Comment #7 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-24 01:04 ---
>If you mean the lack of a diagnostic for a violation of a diagnosable rule in
> the following self-contained source, then yes.
No I mean in the standard C++98 mode which had the same mention about explicit
instant
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-24 00:58 ---
Confirmed, not a regression.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot
|
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-24 00:52 ---
Confirmed, this used to work in 4.0.2.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #3 from bruck dot michael at googlemail dot com 2008-12-24
00:52 ---
Created an attachment (id=16978)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=16978&action=view)
proposed patch to gcc/cp/typeck2.c
- changes type in error message from type to ptrmem_type as was
--- Comment #2 from bruck dot michael at googlemail dot com 2008-12-24
00:48 ---
Created an attachment (id=16977)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=16977&action=view)
Broader test case for incomplete base and object types
test1 shows the case where the base type is in
--- Comment #6 from hstong at ca dot ibm dot com 2008-12-24 00:04 ---
(In reply to comment #5)
If you mean the lack of a diagnostic for a violation of a diagnosable rule in
the following self-contained source, then yes. (Comeau produces a diagnostic
for this violation of N2800 14.7.2 [
--- Comment #2 from mikael at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-23 23:55 ---
Created an attachment (id=16976)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=16976&action=view)
the patch I'm working on
(In reply to comment #1)
> explanation http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2008-12/msg00137.h
--- Comment #9 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-23 23:43
---
Closing, fixed on 4.4
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-23 23:34 ---
Confirmed.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-23 23:32 ---
So the question comes what target has a mode where STRICT_ALIGNMENT is going to
be true and the alignment of the stack is going to be less than the alignment
of that mode?
I think this is invalid. Now x86 has a mod
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-23 23:30 ---
emit_push_insn (val, mode, NULL_TREE, NULL_RTX, PARM_BOUNDARY,
partial, reg, 0, argblock,
GEN_INT (argvec[argnum].locate.offset.constant),
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-23 23:24 ---
Confirmed. Not a regression.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-23 23:21 ---
If that is true then GCC get even explicit instantiation declarations wrong in
general. Because of the way declaration and definitions are defined.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38613
--- Comment #4 from hstong at ca dot ibm dot com 2008-12-23 22:57 ---
The proposed wording (N1987) for 14.7.2 paragraph 7 says:
An explicit instantiation declaration that names a class template
specialization has no effect on the class template specialization itself
(except for perhaps
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-23 22:56 ---
>// we provide explicit instantiation definitions of all the members of struct
Yes but not the class itself.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38613
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-23 22:23 ---
According to http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2006/n1987.htm
You need to instantiation declaration the whole class and not just the member
functions. Or at least the way I read it.
--
http://
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-23 22:19 ---
Can you generate the preprocessed source? This is really an bug in the
i386-pc-mingw32 compiler.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--
hp at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
--- Comment #4 from hp at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-23 22:12 ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> I couldn't spot any bug eyeballing the assembly (or final RTL dump), so can
> you
> please debug how this now fails at runtime (abort, corruption (where), etc.)?
"(i.e. calls to abort)"
Thank
--- Comment #3 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-23 21:52 ---
I couldn't spot any bug eyeballing the assembly (or final RTL dump), so can you
please debug how this now fails at runtime (abort, corruption (where), etc.)?
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
Wha
The host/target revision of gcc is 42901. So it seems that this is not same as
#37258.
i386-pc-mingw32-gcc -c -g -O2 -D__USE_MINGW_ACCESS -DIN_GCC
-DCROSS_DIRECTORY_STRUCTURE -W -Wall -Wwrite-strings -Wstrict-prototypes
-Wmissing-prototypes -Wcast-qual -Wold-style-definition -Wc++-compat
-Wmiss
--- Comment #1 from hstong at ca dot ibm dot com 2008-12-23 21:34 ---
Created an attachment (id=16975)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=16975&action=view)
Original test case
Original test case entered in description.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id
Rejects valid. The following test case fails to link because VFTs are missing.
Based on the C++0x draft (N2800), this program should compile, link and run
successfully.
This appears to be a problem with the GCC implementation of explicit
instantiation
declarations, i.e. extern template.
The sour
--- Comment #13 from jb at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-23 19:36 ---
As testing with a newer binutils apparently isn't forthcoming, closing as
invalid.
As an aside, while AFAIK this is not documented, my intuition is that
libgfortran requires a somewhat up to date libc, so maybe glibc 2.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.4.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38450
--- Comment #3 from jesse at rigidbounds dot com 2008-12-23 19:34 ---
This seems like the same issue to me. The first test() method compiles fine.
The second has the following error:
11: error: expected `;' before "itrValue"
class Test
{
void test(std::list& intList)
{
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-23 19:26 ---
I don't know the override rules that well so I am leaving this for another
developer to decide which is correct.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-23 19:17 ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> I have tried reproducing this bug with the latest 4.3-branch and the problem
> does still appear to exist.
Well nobody said that PR 38367 was fixed on the 4.3 branch, only the trunk.
Can
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-23 19:12 ---
I have a simple fix:
Index: cp-tree.h
===
--- cp-tree.h (revision 142906)
+++ cp-tree.h (working copy)
@@ -2701,7 +2701,8 @@ more_aggr_init_expr_arg
--- Comment #7 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-23 18:59 ---
Please don't re-open bug reports because you "speculate" when others have
analyzed the issue properly.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38608
--- Comment #9 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-23 18:51 ---
Hack demonstrates the problem:
Index: tree-ssa-pre.c
===
--- tree-ssa-pre.c (revision 142907)
+++ tree-ssa-pre.c (working copy)
@@ -3274,6 +32
--- Comment #3 from hp at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-23 18:40 ---
And still visible at r142018...
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38603
--- Comment #2 from hp at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-23 18:30 ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> I haven't read the whole RTL till the last phase, so I don't know where things
> went wrong, but I'm pretty sure the bug isn't in DSE and the recent changes,
It might very well be that your ch
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-23 18:27 ---
Hmm, the user alignment is not set for the canonical type of the struct
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38611
--- Comment #8 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-23 18:19 ---
The problem is that phi_translate returns an expression "eprime" of a different
type. For the test case of comment #6, we phi_translate
"(eq_expr,&state,obj_1)" to "(bool)1".
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_
--- Comment #1 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-23 18:14 ---
The only change my patch does are two successful replace_read calls in DSE,
nothing else changed, and those 2 replacements look correct to me.
In *.optimized we have:
:
D.1233 = __builtin_alloca (20);
:
p = (char *
--- Comment #6 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-23 17:55 ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> Indeed, there may even be a case for splitting up the assert
> expression to make more clear what's failing.
I think they are the same bug because both of them having to do with PRE of
con
--- Comment #7 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-23 17:55 ---
*** Bug 38608 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38564
--- Comment #5 from dcb314 at hotmail dot com 2008-12-23 17:51 ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 38564 ***
I'm not completely sure about this: the original code was
fine at -O2 on x86_64 and failed at -O3 on the same machine.
#38564 did not u
--- Comment #5 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2008-12-23 17:17 ---
*** Bug 38608 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #4 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2008-12-23 17:17 ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 38564 ***
--
hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #6 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2008-12-23 17:19 ---
Another testcase from PR 38608:
--
int dialog_calendar(int state)
{
int *obj = (state == 1 ? &state : 0);
return (obj == &state);
}
---
It failed to -O2:
/tmp/y.c: In function ‘dialog_calendar’:
/tmp/y.c:1: int
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot
|
--- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-23 17:15 ---
First off, stop building with patches, that makes it harder to figure out what
is going on.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38607
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-23 17:04 ---
Very reduced testcase:
int dialog_calendar(int state)
{
int *obj = (state == 1 ? &state : 0);
return (obj == &state);
}
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #2 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2008-12-23 16:38 ---
It may a dup of PR 38564.
--
hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #8 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-23 16:22 ---
Subject: Bug 38590
Author: pinskia
Date: Tue Dec 23 16:21:32 2008
New Revision: 142906
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=142906
Log:
2008-12-23 Andrew Pinski
PR middle-end/38590
--- Comment #7 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-23 16:21 ---
Fixed, thanks for the bug report.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from bruck dot michael at googlemail dot com 2008-12-23
15:53 ---
in the example the last comment should read
// fails because Y is not derived from Base
instead of
// fails because Y is not derived from A
--
bruck dot michael at googlemail dot com changed:
Consider this example:
--
struct Base {};
struct X; // X derived from Base later but incomplete
here
struct Y {};// Y not derived from Base
int test1(int Base::* p2m, X* object)
{
return object->*p2m;// fails because X is incomplete
}
struct
--- Comment #9 from thutt at vmware dot com 2008-12-23 15:44 ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> The compiler may also choose to make optimizations based on
> the knowledge that certain function arguments will not be null.
>
> Witeness the last sentence.
If this is the case, then might it
--- Comment #4 from thutt at vmware dot com 2008-12-23 15:40 ---
/*
I concur with Ulrich, but three years on, using gcc 4.1.2.
Although a parameter which is marked with the 'nonnull' attribute
is demonstrably nonnull, and although the compiler recognizes it is
specifically NULL,
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.3.3 |4.2.5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38611
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.3.3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38611
Take:
typedef struct MyStruct {
unsigned char skip[272];
} MyStruct __attribute__((aligned(128)));
template
int GetAlignOf()
{
int a[ __alignof__(T) != __alignof__(MyStruct) ? -1 : 1];
return __alignof__(T);
};
int main()
{
int al1 = GetAlignOf();
int al2 = __alignof__(MyStruct
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-23 13:36 ---
It would be an One definition rule violation if you define another foo()::
local_ex as you marked foo as default visibility.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38610
void __attribute__((visibility("default"))) foo()
{
struct local_ex { virtual ~local_ex() {} };
try { throw local_ex(); } catch ( local_ex const& ) {}
}
13: 0b5017 OBJECT WEAK DEFAULT 13 _ZTSZ3foovE8local_ex
16: 00200ce032 OBJECT WEAK DEFAULT 2
--- Comment #3 from pluto at agmk dot net 2008-12-23 11:54 ---
(In reply to comment #0)
> There is currently no way to set the visibility of the typeinfo, except by
> setting the visibility of the VTT and vtable.
isn't -fvisibility-ms-compat (from recent gcc) enough for you?
--
htt
With revision 142890 this test passed.
>From revision 142900 and on, this test has failed as follows:
Running
/tmp/hpautotest-gcc1/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/execute/execute.exp ...
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/built-in-setjmp.c execution, -O2
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/built-in-setjmp.c exe
--- Comment #2 from hp at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-23 11:03 ---
The bug is still visible at r142016.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38603
--- Comment #1 from mark at easterbrook dot org dot uk 2008-12-23 10:51
---
The follow fixes it. Tested on several Solaris variants:
Patch to libiberty/vasprintf.c:
*** 79,84
--- 79,85
{
if (*p++ == '%')
{
+ int longs = 0;
while (strch
--- Comment #1 from dcb314 at hotmail dot com 2008-12-23 10:23 ---
Created an attachment (id=16974)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=16974&action=view)
C source code
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38608
I just tried to compile the Suse Linux package dialog-1.1-27.19
with the GNU C compiler version 4.4 snapshot 20081219.
calendar.c: In function 'dialog_calendar':
calendar.c:356: internal compiler error: in insert_into_preds_of_block, at
tree-ssa-pre.c:3131
Please submit a full bug report,
with pre
--- Comment #17 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-23 09:26 ---
(In reply to comment #12)
> (In reply to comment #11)
> > Patch committed, fixed on trunk, 4.4
> I think it was the wrong PR number (35780 instead of PR34820).
>
Dang it! Sorry about that, I used the ChangeLogs from
--- Comment #10 from tammer at tammer dot net 2008-12-23 08:35 ---
Hello,
same error:
echo timestamp > s-attr
/opt/freeware/src/packages/BUILD/gcc-build/./prev-gcc/xgcc
-B/opt/freeware/src/packages/BUILD/gcc-build/./prev-gcc/
-B/opt/freeware/powerpc-ibm-aix5.3.0.0/bin/ -c -O2 -I/opt/f
96 matches
Mail list logo
