http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57341
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57347
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57343
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57348
Bug ID: 57348
Summary: ICE for transaction expression in gimplify_expr
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: li
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57088
Easwaran Raman changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57046
Easwaran Raman changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||eraman at google dot com
--- Comment #8
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57328
Bud Davis changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bdavis at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1 from
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57342
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Depends on||31158
--- Comment #3 from Paolo Carlini
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57342
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54891
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57043
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|converting overloaded |[4.7/4.8/4.9 Regression]
).
$ gcc-trunk -v
gcc version 4.9.0 20130520 (experimental) [trunk revision 199099] (GCC)
$ gcc-trunk -O1 wrong.c
$ ./a.out
1
$ gcc-4.7 -Os wrong.c
$ ./a.out
1
$ gcc-trunk -Os wrong.c
$ ./a.out
0
$
-
int printf(const char *, ...);
struct S1 {
int f0;
int f1 : 10;
int f2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57339
--- Comment #1 from Kazumoto Kojima ---
(In reply to Oleg Endo from comment #0)
> One idea for now would be to emit fixed ISR prologue / epilogue asm blocks
> that deal with the FP regs, if FP regs need to be saved/restored for an ISR.
This would
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57343
Marc Glisse changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Component|rtl-optimizat
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38161
--- Comment #7 from Andrew Pinski ---
*** Bug 57345 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57345
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36453
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|SUSPENDED
--- Comment #12 from Andrew Pin
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36320
Bug 36320 depends on bug 36453, which changed state.
Bug 36453 Summary: [DR 412] PR36320 breaks boost
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36453
What|Removed |Added
---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36453
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Resolution|INVALID
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57346
Bug ID: 57346
Summary: g++ prematurely rejects references to local variables
that are not odr-uses from local classes inside
templates
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57345
signupnathan at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED
Resolu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38161
Harald van Dijk changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||harald at gigawatt dot nl
--- Comment #
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38161
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||signupnathan at gmail dot com
--- Comment
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57345
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|FIXED |DUPLICATE
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelin
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57345
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57345
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
I think GCC is correct as it is processing the macros after they have been
redefined even though they are using #elif.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57345
Bug ID: 57345
Summary: Preprocessor fails to evaluation string token not
valid
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priorit
optimization levels, and 4.7 which
does not.
$ gcc-trunk -v
gcc version 4.9.0 20130520 (experimental) [trunk revision 199099] (GCC)
$ gcc-trunk -O0 -m32 wrong.c
$ ./a.out
-3161
$ gcc-trunk -O1 -m64 wrong.c
$ ./a.out
-3161
$ gcc-4.6 -O1 -m32 wrong.c
$ ./a.out
-3161
$ gcc-trunk -O1 -m32 wrong.c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57102
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57016
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57342
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||manu at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
.
$ gcc-trunk -v
gcc version 4.9.0 20130520 (experimental) [trunk revision 199099] (GCC)
$ gcc-trunk -O1 wrong.c
$ ./a.out
4
$ gcc-4.7 -Os wrong.c
$ ./a.out
4
$ gcc-trunk -Os wrong.c
$ ./a.out
0
$
--
int printf (const char *, ...);
int a[6];
int b, c, d, e;
int f
tern/root/bin/g++
COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/usr/local/google/home/austern/root/libexec/gcc/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/4.9.0/lto-wrapper
Target: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
Configured with: ../gcc/configure --prefix=/usr/local/google/home/austern/root
--enable-languages=c++
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.9.0 20130520 (experimental) (GCC)
[isolde:tmp]$
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57330
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
all optimization levels
with gcc 4.7.
$ gcc-trunk -v
gcc version 4.9.0 20130520 (experimental) [trunk revision 199099] (GCC)
$ gcc-trunk -O2 -m32 wrong.c
$ ./a.out
1
$ gcc-trunk -O3 -m64 wrong.c
$ ./a.out
1
$ gcc-4.7 -O3 -m32 wrong.c
$ ./a.out
1
$ gcc-trunk -O3 -m32 wrong.c
$ ./a.out
0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57340
Bug ID: 57340
Summary: [4.9 regression] stage2 miscompiles
build/genconditions on armv5tel-linux-gnueabi breaking
bootstrap
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55465
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55465
--- Comment #14 from Tobias Burnus ---
Author: burnus
Date: Mon May 20 20:08:05 2013
New Revision: 199120
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=199120&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2013-05-20 Tobias Burnus
PR fortran/48858
PR fortran/5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55465
Bug 55465 depends on bug 48858, which changed state.
Bug 48858 Summary: Incorrect error for same binding label on two generic
interface specifics
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48858
What|Removed |
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53478
Bug 53478 depends on bug 48858, which changed state.
Bug 48858 Summary: Incorrect error for same binding label on two generic
interface specifics
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48858
What|Removed |
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48858
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57337
Pat Haugen changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pthaugen at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48858
--- Comment #16 from Tobias Burnus ---
Author: burnus
Date: Mon May 20 20:08:05 2013
New Revision: 199120
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=199120&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2013-05-20 Tobias Burnus
PR fortran/48858
PR fortran/5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48858
--- Comment #15 from Tobias Burnus ---
Author: burnus
Date: Mon May 20 20:05:40 2013
New Revision: 199119
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=199119&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2013-05-20 Tobias Burnus
PR fortran/48858
* decl.c (ad
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48858
--- Comment #14 from Tobias Burnus ---
Author: burnus
Date: Mon May 20 20:03:48 2013
New Revision: 199118
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=199118&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2013-05-20 Tobias Burnus
PR fortran/48858
* decl.c (gf
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57038
--- Comment #23 from Martin Liška ---
The patch fixed weakrefs problems.
Compilation goes further and some undefined stuff in libreoffice is met:
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=61627
I think this gcc bug could be closed.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36486
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|jason at gcc dot gnu.org |
--- Comment #6 from Paolo Carlini
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36486
Richard Smith changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57316
--- Comment #3 from Paul H. Hargrove ---
(In reply to Kostya Serebryany from comment #1)
> Sorry for the breakages, but we are unable to monitor build failures on old
> kernels unless someone sets up a regular testing (build bot) with such kernels
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37140
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu.org|fabien at gcc dot
gnu.org
--- Com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36486
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu.org|jason at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comme
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12288
--- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Excellent, thanks!
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54651
Marc Glisse changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12288
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Known to work|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57338
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-invalid-code
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57035
--- Comment #1 from Tobias Burnus ---
Should be fixed by the - pending - patch:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2013-04/msg00206.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57319
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57325
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56547
--- Comment #2 from Oleg Endo ---
Fixed for SH on 4.9:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs/gcc?view=revision&revision=199110
gcc/ChangeLog:
PR target/56547
* config/sh/sh.md (fmasf4): Remove empty constraints strings.
(*fmasf4, *fmasf4_media
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57303
--- Comment #6 from Marc Glisse ---
I wonder if, in addition to fixing the sink pass, we should add an optimization
like the following (it passes bootstrap+testsuite, but I am not so sure where
it should go and what it should look like exactly).
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57317
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57199
Paul Pluzhnikov changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57339
Bug ID: 57339
Summary: [SH] Wrong ISR FPU register save/restore
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12288
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu.org|
Assignee|unassigned at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57199
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek ---
But this isn't any form of the may invoke, the loop certainly unconditionally
invokes undefined behavior, just the whole loop is very unlikely to be ever
executed (in this case if size is supposed to represent
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57199
--- Comment #4 from Paul Pluzhnikov ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #3)
> it can't prove the following loop that uses _8 as upper bound is dead, ...
Do we need a separate "may invoke undefined behavior" warning?
In our codebase of 10
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57337
--- Comment #1 from Easwaran Raman ---
Could you please attach the preprocessed file? Thanks.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56950
--- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Steven Bosscher from comment #7)
> Index: haifa-sched.c
> ===
> --- haifa-sched.c (revision 199028)
> +++ haifa-sched.c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56950
--- Comment #8 from stevenb.gcc at gmail dot com
---
> --- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
> That still doesn't look safe -fcompare-debug wise.
> I mean, if BB ends in a DEBUG_INSN (or more), it could be preceeded by note,
> label, or some oth
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57338
Bug ID: 57338
Summary: ICE with assumed rank
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
Assignee:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56950
--- Comment #7 from Steven Bosscher ---
Index: haifa-sched.c
===
--- haifa-sched.c (revision 199028)
+++ haifa-sched.c (working copy)
@@ -7435,20 +7435,19 @@ find_fallthru
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57337
Bug ID: 57337
Summary: 416.gamess ICE on x86 after r199048
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimizat
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57319
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
Status|UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56950
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
That still doesn't look safe -fcompare-debug wise.
I mean, if BB ends in a DEBUG_INSN (or more), it could be preceeded by note,
label, or some other insns. So shouldn't that be instead
rtx insn2 = DEBUG_INS
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23608
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38470
Bug 38470 depends on bug 23608, which changed state.
Bug 23608 Summary: constant propagation (CCP) would improve -Wsign-compare
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23608
What|Removed |Added
-
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56950
--- Comment #5 from Steven Bosscher ---
This patch makes the ICE go away, but it doesn't really solve the bug.
The scheduler inserts (in this case) notes between basic blocks in the
sched1 pass, which runs in cfglayout mode. But "between basic b
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53991
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57038
Dmitry G. Dyachenko changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dimhen at gmail dot com
--- Comment
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57267
Dmitry G. Dyachenko changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53991
--- Comment #5 from Jan Hubicka ---
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53991
>
> --- Comment #4 from Uroš Bizjak ---
> The inlining is failed in ipa-inline.c, around line 294:
>
> /* TM pure functions should not be inlined into non
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57267
--- Comment #4 from Jan Hubicka ---
> is this PR duplicate of lto/57038 ?
You are right, I meant lto/57038.
This PR is not exactly dup of lto/57038, but while fixing lto/57038 I
constructed artificial testcase similar to yours
and thus the problem
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57038
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57335
Daniel Krügler changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||daniel.kruegler@googlemail.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23608
--- Comment #9 from Paolo Carlini ---
(Nit: the location is off by 2 chars, I think I can easily fix this separately:
build_new_op_1 isn't propagating loc to cp_build_binary_op)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23608
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu.org|
--- Comment #8 from Paolo Carlini
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20724
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|gcc-bugs at g
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57335
--- Comment #1 from Paolo Carlini ---
Note: all the other compilers I have at hand reject the snippet with an error
message about the static_assert expression not being constant (which behavior,
in case the analysis shows it's correct, would be ea
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57335
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57336
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||4.7.3, 4.8.0
Known to fail|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57336
Bug ID: 57336
Summary: [4.8/4.9 Regression] Cannot INVOKE a reference_wrapper
around an abstract type
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: r
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57335
Bug ID: 57335
Summary: internal compiler error: in cxx_eval_bit_field_ref, at
cp/semantics.c:6977
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: norma
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57267
--- Comment #3 from Dmitry G. Dyachenko ---
testcase fixed in 198917
is this PR duplicate of lto/57038 ?
and how it's related to lto/47375 ? Sounds like PR number mismatch...
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23885
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57327
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10207
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57333
--- Comment #3 from bernhard.hartleb at gmail dot com ---
(In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #2)
> LZCNT insn is part of ABM abi, and is enabled with -mabm. Does LZCNT insn
> really cause SIGILL on your target?
No sorry, this was an error on my
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51976
--- Comment #10 from Tobias Burnus ---
FYI: Ian Hardy has some fancy examples uses character(:) in DT at the bottom of
the thread http://software.intel.com/en-us/forums/topic/326077 (attached files)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57199
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57175
Marc Glisse changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
1 - 100 of 102 matches
Mail list logo
