http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60661
--- Comment #2 from Tobias Burnus ---
Quote from the standard:
http://mailman.j3-fortran.org/pipermail/j3/2014-March/007259.html
The key paragraph is [176:22]:
"At the completion of the execution of the DO statement, the execution cycle
begins."
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60606
D.Salikhov changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED
Resolution|WONTFIX
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60680
Bug ID: 60680
Summary: unqalified-id expected, gcc fails to diagnose and
accepts invalid
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60679
Bug ID: 60679
Summary: class specialization not instantiated even though it
is a better match than the primary template
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58014
John David Anglin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56382
John David Anglin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55943
--- Comment #9 from John David Anglin ---
*** Bug 56382 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51853
John David Anglin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54083
--- Comment #20 from dave.anglin at bell dot net ---
On 26-Mar-14, at 7:29 PM, dominiq at lps dot ens.fr wrote:
> Do you remember any post about it?
See this thread:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-03/msg01222.html
I'm not sure when the s
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60675
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54083
--- Comment #19 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> I have patch which removes the default args from the above line.
> They are no longer needed.
I was wondering why it was removed on my G5 darwin9:
--- ../_gcc_clean/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/torture/p
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54083
--- Comment #18 from dave.anglin at bell dot net ---
On 26-Mar-14, at 6:11 PM, dominiq at lps dot ens.fr wrote:
> /* { dg-skip-if "No undefined weak" { hppa*-*-hpux* && { ! lp64 } }
> { "*" } {
> "" } } */
I have patch which removes the default
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54083
--- Comment #17 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
The test gcc.dg/torture/pr60092.c fails on powerpc-apple-darwin9 for the same
reason. It is fixed by the patch
--- ../_clean/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/torture/pr60092.c2014-03-24
08:05:33.0 +01
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58139
--- Comment #15 from Maciej W. Rozycki ---
There is no ICE, this is target code in libgcc_s.so.1 calling abort at
run time whenever the DWARF2 unwinder is called. Shall I send you
binaries?
NB SPE GPRs indeed are 64-bit wide even on 32-bit targe
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60315
--- Comment #16 from Jan Hubicka ---
> forwprop would do that, but the enum is unsigned int while the
> switch value is int and thus simplify_gimple_switch bails out
> because the conversion is not value-preserving.
>
> So the frontend would need
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60675
--- Comment #7 from Andrew Pinski ---
Created attachment 32461
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=32461&action=edit
More reduced (below 14k)
>From this reduced testcase here is the most important info from the reload
dump:
344:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58139
--- Comment #14 from Peter Bergner ---
(In reply to Maciej W. Rozycki from comment #13)
> This breaks Power SPE targets, at least the Linux OS, almost surely EABI
> too. Seen in 4.8 powerpc-linux-gnu g++ and libstdc++ testing as some 700
> regres
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52369
--- Comment #3 from fabien at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: fabien
Date: Wed Mar 26 21:33:28 2014
New Revision: 208854
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=208854&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2014-03-26 Fabien Chene
PR c++/52369
* cp/met
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39284
Timo Kreuzer changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||timo.kreuzer at reactos dot org
--- Commen
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60678
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60576
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek ---
H.J. just filed a separate PR about the ichar_3.f90 failure in PR60678.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57199
--- Comment #8 from Paul Pluzhnikov ---
(In reply to Mikhail Veltishchev from comment #7)
> Please, can you explain how you fixed this? We have almost the same problem.
Here is the fix we deployed (test case from comment#2):
$ diff -u pr57199.c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60678
Bug ID: 60678
Summary: [4.9 Regression] FAIL:
gfortran.dg/intrinsics_kind_argument_1.f90 -O (test
for excess errors)
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Stat
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60657
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=60677
Bug ID: 60677
Summary: [4.9 Regression] FAIL: gfortran.dg/ichar_3.f90 -O
(test for excess errors)
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: norm
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60657
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Note the code isn't invalid, just has undefined behavior.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60128
--- Comment #52 from dave.anglin at bell dot net ---
On 3/26/2014 4:20 PM, dominiq at lps dot ens.fr wrote:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60128
>
> --- Comment #51 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
>> This is what the HP-UX Floating-Po
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34928
--- Comment #11 from dominiq at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: dominiq
Date: Wed Mar 26 20:39:42 2014
New Revision: 208852
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=208852&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR fortran/34928
* fortran.texi: Document Vo
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57199
Mikhail Veltishchev changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dichlofos-mv at yandex dot ru
--- C
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60128
--- Comment #51 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> This is what the HP-UX Floating-Point Guide says:
>
> If two representable values are equally close to
> the true value, choose the one whose least significant
> bit is 0.
This is round to even on t
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60128
--- Comment #50 from dave.anglin at bell dot net ---
On 3/26/2014 3:43 PM, dave.anglin at bell dot net wrote:
> It looks like hppa rounds toward zero on tie.
This is what the HP-UX Floating-Point Guide says:
If two representable values are equall
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59548
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Known to work|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60128
--- Comment #49 from dave.anglin at bell dot net ---
On 3/26/2014 2:07 PM, dominiq at lps dot ens.fr wrote:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60128
>
> --- Comment #48 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
>>> AFAICT on hppa*-*-hpux11* the E f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59548
--- Comment #8 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Wed Mar 26 19:41:16 2014
New Revision: 208850
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=208850&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/59548
* include/debug/safe_unordered_base.h (_Safe_uno
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59545
--- Comment #11 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Mar 26 19:32:40 2014
New Revision: 208848
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=208848&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR other/59545
* real.c (real_to_integer2): Change type of low to U
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60675
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski ---
I can reproduce it, I am trying to reduce it. Note using -mcpu=cortex-a57 also
causes the internal error to go away. So I think the scheduler before the
register allocator is causing some differences.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59296
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
reduced:
struct Type
{
void get() const& { }
void get() const&& { }
};
int main()
{
Type{}.get();
}
The ambiguity happens when both overloads are const-qualified and *this is an
rvalue
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60631
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59296
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||paul at preney dot ca
--- Comment #1 fr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60673
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60676
Bug ID: 60676
Summary: Add vec_xxsldi, vec_xxpermdi to altivec.h
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60675
--- Comment #5 from David Abdurachmanov
---
Created attachment 32460
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=32460&action=edit
Minimized pre-processed file
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60675
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Target|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59093
--- Comment #5 from Matt Thompson ---
An additional thought. You have a reduced test case which dies in Comment #3
(which fails for gfortran 4.9). However, you can make something similar which
succeeds:
program main
implicit none
type :: MA
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60675
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to David Abdurachmanov from comment #1)
> Seems the testcase is too large. Trimming it more usually causes it not to
> ICE, but will try to trim more.
Does compressing it help with the size to attac
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60675
--- Comment #3 from David Abdurachmanov
---
With `-mno-lra` compiles fine.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60545
--- Comment #2 from Josh Triplett ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> The attribute is ms_abi. It is documented in 4.4.0 and above.
>
> From GCC 4.5.0 docuemtnation:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-4.45.0/gcc/Function-Attribute
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60640
--- Comment #2 from Martin Jambor ---
Created attachment 32459
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=32459&action=edit
Possible fix
The problem is that IPA-CP skips thunks when it redirects edges to the
new clones it produces.
I am
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60128
--- Comment #48 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> > AFAICT on hppa*-*-hpux11* the E format does not round to nearest for tie.
> > What
> > is the output of the following test
> >
> > ...
> >
> > ? On x86_64-apple-darwin13, I get '1.0e+04 9.8e+03'.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60128
--- Comment #47 from dave.anglin at bell dot net ---
On 3/26/2014 12:34 PM, dominiq at lps dot ens.fr wrote:
> AFAICT on hppa*-*-hpux11* the E format does not round to nearest for tie. What
> is the output of the following test
>
> #include "stdio.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60655
--- Comment #7 from Ramana Radhakrishnan ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #5)
> As discussed yesterday with Ramana on IRC, my suggested fix for this for 4.9
> is something like:
> --- gcc/dwarf2out.c 2014-03-03 08:24:14.841895755 +010
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60655
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassi
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60566
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60674
Bug 60674 depends on bug 60566, which changed state.
Bug 60566 Summary: [4.9 Regression] r208573 omits needed thunks
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60566
What|Removed |Added
-
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60675
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60675
--- Comment #1 from David Abdurachmanov
---
Seems the testcase is too large. Trimming it more usually causes it not to ICE,
but will try to trim more.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60675
Bug ID: 60675
Summary: [4.9 regression][aarch64] internal compiler error:
Max. number of generated reload insns per insn is
achieved (90)
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58678
--- Comment #55 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Wed Mar 26 16:50:26 2014
New Revision: 208845
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=208845&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/60566
PR c++/58678
* class.c (build_vtbl_initializer): H
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60566
--- Comment #14 from Jason Merrill ---
Author: jason
Date: Wed Mar 26 16:50:26 2014
New Revision: 208845
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=208845&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c++/60566
PR c++/58678
* class.c (build_vtbl_initializer): H
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60674
Bug ID: 60674
Summary: missed devirtualization in function called by
destructor
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priori
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60673
Bug ID: 60673
Summary: c++11 static thread_local members may cause a segfault
when accessed via 'this->'
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60128
--- Comment #46 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
AFAICT on hppa*-*-hpux11* the E format does not round to nearest for tie. What
is the output of the following test
#include "stdio.h"
int main() {
printf("%.1e %.1e\n", 9950.0, 9750.0);
return
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60504
--- Comment #13 from Eric Botcazou ---
> I've now done full before-and-after bootstrap+testsuite runs with
> --enable-languages=all,ada,go,obj-c++ on armv5tel-linux-gnueabi: Eric's
> patch fixed all Ada regressions, and added no new regressions.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60672
Bug ID: 60672
Summary: FAIL: g++.dg/cpp1y/auto-fn25.C -std=gnu++1y (test for
errors, line 7)
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60671
Bug ID: 60671
Summary: FAIL: g++.dg/pr49718.C -std=gnu++98
scan-assembler-times __cyg_profile_func_enter 1
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severi
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60128
--- Comment #45 from dave.anglin at bell dot net ---
On 3/26/2014 11:09 AM, dominiq at lps dot ens.fr wrote:
> What is the output of
>
>use ISO_FORTRAN_ENV
>print *, REAL_KINDS
> end
>
> ?
4 8 16
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60128
--- Comment #44 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
What is the output of
use ISO_FORTRAN_ENV
print *, REAL_KINDS
end
?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60606
Richard Earnshaw changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60670
Bug ID: 60670
Summary: omp.h may differ between multilibs
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libgomp
Hi Guys,
Suppose a programmer creates a function called "memset" and then
compiles it with gcc. Eg:
% cat memset.c
void *
memset (void *s, int c, unsigned int n)
{
char *v = s;
while (n--)
*v++ = c;
return s;
}
% gcc -O3 -S -fno-bui
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60128
--- Comment #43 from dave.anglin at bell dot net ---
On 3/26/2014 8:51 AM, dominiq at lps dot ens.fr wrote:
> Can you uncomment the line
>
> !print *, n_tst, n_cnt
>
> and post the corresponding output?
(en15.2) -98.77E+03 expected:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60419
Martin Jambor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60659
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=60419
--- Comment #20 from Martin Jambor ---
Author: jamborm
Date: Wed Mar 26 13:47:46 2014
New Revision: 208844
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=208844&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2014-03-26 Martin Jambor
PR ipa/60419
* ipa.c (symtab_rem
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59908
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener ---
PR39612?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60128
--- Comment #42 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> > After r208780 (for 4.9, not backported yet to 4.8)?
>
> Yes, it still fails on hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.11. Maybe list is shorter:
>
> Unsupported rounding for real(16)
> ...
So the line
! { dg-final
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60657
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.9.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60659
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.9.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60669
--- Comment #1 from Richard Biener ---
because it's not used in the paths dominated by the conditional.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60128
--- Comment #41 from dave.anglin at bell dot net ---
On 25-Mar-14, at 11:14 AM, dominiq at lps dot ens.fr wrote:
> After r208780 (for 4.9, not backported yet to 4.8)?
Yes, it still fails on hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.11. Maybe list is shorter:
Unsuppor
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60504
--- Comment #12 from Mikael Pettersson ---
(In reply to Mikael Pettersson from comment #10)
> (In reply to Eric Botcazou from comment #9)
> > That's good news, thanks. Did you do a testsuite run for all languages?
>
> Sorry, didn't have time for
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60669
Bug ID: 60669
Summary: VRP misses asserts for some already defined statements
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compon
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28767
--- Comment #5 from Mark Wielaard ---
Some discussion of the patch in comment #4 can be found here:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-05/threads.html#00225
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60636
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51088
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=60662
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
I can't reproduce this with 4.8.1 or later versions on Fedora, or 4.8.3 on
Debian, neither using your original source code nor your preprocessed source.
Please try debugging this yourself or report it to Ub
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60642
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60667
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Created attachment 32458
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=32458&action=edit
gcc49-ubsan.patch
Ah, sounds like a very recent regression, most likely Honza's r208831.
Now, this patch makes ub
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51088
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60649
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59908
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60655
--- Comment #6 from ramrad01 at arm dot com ---
On 03/26/14 09:46, jakub at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60655
>
> Jakub Jelinek changed:
>
> What|Removed |Added
> ---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60655
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #5 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60667
Andrew Haley changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||aph at redhat dot com
--- Comment #2 from
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56781
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Mar 26 09:19:44 2014
New Revision: 208842
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=208842&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR sanitizer/56781
* Makefile.def: Set bootstrap=true; for host fixi
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60636
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Mar 26 09:18:26 2014
New Revision: 208841
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=208841&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR sanitizer/60636
* ubsan.c (instrument_si_overflow): Instrument AB
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59545
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ian at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #10 fr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60668
Bug ID: 60668
Summary: simplify-rtx.c:1676: minor tidyup in if ... else chain
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: minor
Priority: P3
Compone
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60315
--- Comment #15 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Wed, 26 Mar 2014, hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60315
>
> --- Comment #14 from Jan Hubicka ---
> The compile time hog issue is fixed now. We
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60667
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tromey at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1
1 - 100 of 118 matches
Mail list logo
