https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63304
ard.biesheuvel at linaro dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ard.biesheuvel at linar
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69452
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69452
Jeffrey A. Law changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||richard.guenther at gmail dot
com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53690
--- Comment #13 from Wesley J. Landaker ---
However, it is fixed the 6.0 preview version, which is good!
$ g++ --version
g++ (Debian 6-20160117-1) 6.0.0 20160117 (experimental) [trunk revision 232481]
Copyright (C) 2016 Free Software Foundation,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53690
--- Comment #12 from Wesley J. Landaker ---
This bug is marked fixed, but it is still present in g++ 5.3.1.
$ g++ --version
g++ (Debian 5.3.1-4) 5.3.1 20151219
Copyright (C) 2015 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
This is free software; see the sour
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69460
--- Comment #2 from strntydog at gmail dot com ---
This code generation problem was also reported at:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/gcc-arm-embedded/+bug/1502611
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69460
--- Comment #1 from strntydog at gmail dot com ---
Created attachment 37452
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37452&action=edit
Script to build the test and generate output files
This script builds the test.c file for both Cort
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69460
Bug ID: 69460
Summary: ARM Cortex M0 produces suboptimal code vs Cortex M3
Product: gcc
Version: 5.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Componen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69453
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28366
--- Comment #2 from Bill Schmidt ---
Actually, the code you get for -mcpu=power6 looks "fine." The originally
reported problem was for use of stvewx to store single vector elements, rather
than using stvx to store entire vectors. This is now ha
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37595
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28314
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69456
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jvdelisle at gcc dot
gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69454
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68986
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kirill.yukhin at intel dot com
--- Comment #7
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69146
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28366
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68442
--- Comment #10 from Jerry DeLisle ---
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Sun Jan 24 22:18:20 2016
New Revision: 232780
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=232780&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2016-01-23 Jerry DeLisle
PR fortran/69397
PR fort
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69397
--- Comment #5 from Jerry DeLisle ---
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Sun Jan 24 22:18:20 2016
New Revision: 232780
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=232780&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2016-01-23 Jerry DeLisle
PR fortran/69397
PR fortr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30971
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69193
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Status|UNC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69459
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69459
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |5.4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69459
Bug ID: 69459
Summary: [5/6 Regression] wrong code with -O2 and vector
arithmetics @ x86_64
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: wrong-code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68986
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69450
--- Comment #10 from dave.anglin at bell dot net ---
On 2016-01-24, at 4:20 PM, redi at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> We might also want to split
> _GLIBCXX_NO_OBSOLETE_ISINF_ISNAN_DYNAMIC into two macros (although that's not
> needed for the only cur
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69450
--- Comment #9 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Thanks, looks good. We might also want to split
_GLIBCXX_NO_OBSOLETE_ISINF_ISNAN_DYNAMIC into two macros (although that's not
needed for the only current user of that macro, GNU/Linux, where they're either
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65834
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
Severity|normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65777
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65769
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
Note GCC will optimize the object call into a __builtin_trap now too.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69305
--- Comment #12 from Richard Henderson ---
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-01/msg01829.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68986
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hjl.tools at gmail dot com
--- Comment #6
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38168
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38170
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69450
--- Comment #8 from dave.anglin at bell dot net ---
On 2016-01-24, at 2:16 PM, redi at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> I can prepare a patch to do that tomorrow.
This is what I'm testing. Not quite to failure point in build.
--
John David Anglin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65741
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65707
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Last reconfirmed|201
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65700
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||documentation
Status|UNCONFI
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65668
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
URL|https://gist.github.com/mrv |
|n/0c79b146f74c28da40
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65662
--- Comment #9 from Andrew Pinski ---
I wonder when 52bit support will be added to AARCH64 ASAN ... 52bit VA is an
optional part of ARMv8.2.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65281
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> GCC_GTHR_POSIX_H gets converted into _GLIBCXX_GCC_GTHR_POSIX_H
Indeed, most of the macros I referred to actually get transformed and so are
OK.
> I think UNUS
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69450
--- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely ---
I can prepare a patch to do that tomorrow.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69450
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |6.0
--- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakel
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65294
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65545
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65426
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||missed-optimization
Last reconfirmed|2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65356
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69351
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||doko at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #7 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69457
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Version|6.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69458
Bug ID: 69458
Summary: [graphite] compiling gmp -floop-nest-optimize over
-fstrict-overflow produces wrong code (fpe)
Product: gcc
Version: 5.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69457
Bug ID: 69457
Summary: gcc leaves temp files behind if invoked as "gcc @file"
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compone
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65306
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65189
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65189
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.9.4
Summary|Malformed (C++)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66094
--- Comment #8 from Thomas Koenig ---
Author: tkoenig
Date: Sun Jan 24 18:15:08 2016
New Revision: 232779
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=232779&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2016-01-24 Thomas Koenig
PR fortran/66094
* frontend
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65299
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69452
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65281
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
GCC_GTHR_POSIX_H gets converted into _GLIBCXX_GCC_GTHR_POSIX_H
I think UNUSED was GCC_GTHR_UNUSED it would have been converted into
_GLIBCXX_GCC_GTHR_UNUSED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69456
--- Comment #3 from Josiah Schwab ---
(In reply to kargl from comment #2)
> (In reply to Josiah Schwab from comment #0)
> >
> > I read the code for the function parse_real in libgfortran/io/list_read.c
> > and this behavior appears to exist beca
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24666
Bug 24666 depends on bug 24664, which changed state.
Bug 24664 Summary: Template instantiation generating an array of voids doesn't
fail
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24664
What|Removed |Added
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24666
Bug 24666 depends on bug 24663, which changed state.
Bug 24663 Summary: Template instantiation generating a zero-sized array doesn't
fail
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24663
What|Removed |Added
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24663
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|NEW
Resolution|FIXED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24664
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|NEW
Resolution|FIXED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24666
Bug 24666 depends on bug 11858, which changed state.
Bug 11858 Summary: Name lookup error ignored when instantiated from expression
within sizeof() in template function parameter
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11858
What
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11858
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|NEW
Resolution|FIXED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24664
--- Comment #5 from Patrick Palka ---
Author: ppalka
Date: Sun Jan 24 17:45:21 2016
New Revision: 232778
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=232778&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Revert "Fix the remaining PR c++/24666 blockers"
gcc/cp/ChangeLog:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24663
--- Comment #5 from Patrick Palka ---
Author: ppalka
Date: Sun Jan 24 17:45:21 2016
New Revision: 232778
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=232778&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Revert "Fix the remaining PR c++/24666 blockers"
gcc/cp/ChangeLog:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11858
--- Comment #8 from Patrick Palka ---
Author: ppalka
Date: Sun Jan 24 17:45:21 2016
New Revision: 232778
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=232778&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Revert "Fix the remaining PR c++/24666 blockers"
gcc/cp/ChangeLog:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24666
--- Comment #4 from Patrick Palka ---
Author: ppalka
Date: Sun Jan 24 17:45:21 2016
New Revision: 232778
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=232778&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Revert "Fix the remaining PR c++/24666 blockers"
gcc/cp/ChangeLog:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69456
--- Comment #2 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Josiah Schwab from comment #0)
>
> I read the code for the function parse_real in libgfortran/io/list_read.c
> and this behavior appears to exist because the value '1+1' is permitted a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65221
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||rejects-valid
Status|UNCONFI
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67295
--- Comment #12 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
WRT c#10. I've never looked at any enabling/disabling aspects of REE. But it
can exploit using implicit and explicit extensions in the IL to remove later
extensions in the IL.
It also handles cases that
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69450
--- Comment #5 from John David Anglin ---
The configure check in acinclude.m4 doesn't work:
checking for obsolete isinf and isnan functions in ... no
It appears the problem is there is an obsolete isnan but not isinf. We have
in config.log:
c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69329
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69329
--- Comment #6 from Mikhail Maltsev ---
Author: miyuki
Date: Sun Jan 24 15:32:17 2016
New Revision: 232777
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=232777&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Pass LSAN_OPTIONS to Makefiles in subdirectories
PR bootstrap/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69298
--- Comment #2 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
Created attachment 37448
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37448&action=edit
Self-contained variant
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69456
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69456
Bug ID: 69456
Summary: Namelist value with trailing sign is ignored without
error
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prior
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69298
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69450
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69450
--- Comment #3 from John David Anglin ---
Created attachment 37447
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37447&action=edit
Patch
The attached include hack removes the XOPEN declaration for isnan. It fixes
the build error but I'm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69455
--- Comment #5 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
The problem is gone if I revert revision r229540.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68283
--- Comment #15 from dominiq at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: dominiq
Date: Sun Jan 24 13:13:38 2016
New Revision: 232776
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=232776&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2016-01-24 Dominique d'Humieres
PR fortran/6828
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68283
--- Comment #14 from dominiq at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: dominiq
Date: Sun Jan 24 13:12:44 2016
New Revision: 232775
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=232775&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2016-01-24 Dominique d'Humieres
PR fortran/68283
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69455
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69329
--- Comment #5 from Mikhail Maltsev ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #4)
> And
> $(if $(LSAN_OPTIONS),"LSAN_OPTIONS=$(LSAN_OPTIONS)")
> doesn't work either? That would match more what is there for other options.
It works fine. https:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64903
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
No, it hasn't.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65108
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Indeed, Foo::one is not a definition, but Bar::two is a definition.
https://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/VerboseDiagnostics#missing_static_const_definition
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69450
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68986
--- Comment #5 from Mark Wielaard ---
Thanks for finding the duplicate and creating a small reproducer. This is
indeed a GCC 6 regression. valgrind builds fine with gcc (GCC) 5.3.1 20151207
(Red Hat 5.3.1-2) but fails with gcc (GCC) 6.0.0 2016012
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64992
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek ---
Well, if the value range for one MULT_EXPR operand is [0, 1], then it will
never overflow, and is enough to know the other operand is ~[0, 0] and it can
be optimized to the [0, 1] range operand.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69455
--- Comment #3 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
For the record, the test in comment 1 is a reduced version of the James Van
Busker's long test at
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.lang.fortran/WzM5bNfB-hw.
The following code
module kind
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69455
Iain Sandoe changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68986
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||trippels at gcc dot gnu.org
K
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69455
--- Comment #1 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
Similar problem with
block
use, intrinsic :: ISO_FORTRAN_ENV, only: wp => REAL32, ik => INT32
print *, ik, wp
end block
block
use, intrinsic :: ISO_FORTRAN_ENV, only: wp => REAL64, ik => INT64
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69455
Bug ID: 69455
Summary: [5/6 Regression] Linking error(s) when using intrinsic
modules in two BLOCK
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: norma
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68986
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mark at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69454
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69454
Bug ID: 69454
Summary: ix86_expand_prologue internal compiler error:
Segmentation fault
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67063
--- Comment #8 from HEMMI, Shigeru ---
FYI,
At the moment(Sun Jan 24 20:32:54 JST 2016), this bug fixed perfectly.
Currently, am using gfortran of "gcc version 5.3.0 (x86_64-posix-seh-rev0,
Built by MinGW-W64 project)".
Let me express my apprec
1 - 100 of 105 matches
Mail list logo
