https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69821
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
Patches should be sent to gcc-patches@.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69821
--- Comment #1 from hongxu jia ---
Created attachment 37691
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37691&action=edit
add option
Compile without this fix:
objdump -g packages-split/lib32-glibc-dev/usr/lib/gcrt1.o
...
|<5f> DW_
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69821
Bug ID: 69821
Summary: -fdebug-prefix-map doesn't affect gcc command line
switches in DWARF DW_AT_producer.
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Se
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69820
--- Comment #1 from Vsevolod Livinskiy ---
Created attachment 37690
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37690&action=edit
Preprocessed testcase.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69820
Bug ID: 69820
Summary: Test was miss compiled with -O3 option.
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68580
--- Comment #10 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org ---
posted RFC: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-02/msg00949.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69785
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66726
--- Comment #18 from kugan at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Reverted r233362 as it caused PR69786 and PR69781. I will test for these and
post a revised patch for next stage1.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69586
--- Comment #2 from Thomas Preud'homme ---
Hi Richard,
Any progress on this?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69076
Thomas Preud'homme changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68632
Thomas Preud'homme changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69371
Thomas Preud'homme changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69819
kugan at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kugan at gcc dot gnu.org
--- C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69764
Thomas Preud'homme changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||thopre01 at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60850
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64531
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69780
--- Comment #4 from Martin Sebor ---
Patch posted for review:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-02/msg00947.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69818
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic, easyhack
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69589
--- Comment #12 from kugan at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 37688
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37688&action=edit
possible fix
This fixes the testcase.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69589
--- Comment #11 from kugan at gcc dot gnu.org ---
In remove_unreachable_nodes, just before ipa-cp, this node becomes local
(address taken is false and local.local = true). After that, when
ipa_propagate_frequency is run, which updates the frequenc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69819
Bug ID: 69819
Summary: ICE on invalid code on x86_64-linux-gnu in tree check:
expected function_type or method_type, have array_type
in function_args_iter_init, at tree.h:4536
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69778
--- Comment #2 from Manuel López-Ibáñez ---
Bonus points if instead of creating a useless tree, the error uses %qv to print
the qualifiers, as the C FE does.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69778
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||easyhack
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69818
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Chris Studholme from comment #0)
> Hopefully this pattern is not common with typedefs like this, but I have
> encountered bugs in generic code where the typedefs are instead template
> paramete
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69777
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||manu at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69785
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||manu at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69793
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69780
Martin Sebor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69780
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52595
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||c_lehmann at posteo dot de
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69809
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69710
--- Comment #11 from amker at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Doug Gilmore from comment #10)
> Created attachment 37681 [details]
> prototype fix
>
> > 1) we failed recognize that use 0 and 2 are identical to each other.
> > This is because vect
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69808
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|FIXED |INVALID
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan W
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69241
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||compnerd at compnerd dot org
--- C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69817
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69797
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69817
Bug ID: 69817
Summary: [REGRESSION] ICE in assign_temp at function.c:691
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: m
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69801
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69802
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69753
--- Comment #6 from Patrick Palka ---
I wonder if adding a non-static overload of FromWebContents should affect the
dependent-ness of guest, e.g.:
class A {
public:
template void As();
static A *FromWebContents();
template
A *FromWebCo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68643
John David Anglin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68746
--- Comment #5 from John David Anglin ---
Test fails on hpux because ios has the value 0 after following read:
read(10, iostat=ios) c
It would pass if check was:
if ((ios.ne.21).and.(ios.ne.0)) then
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60526
--- Comment #15 from Thomas Koenig ---
Author: tkoenig
Date: Sun Feb 14 17:08:44 2016
New Revision: 233413
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=233413&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2016-02-14 Thomas Koenig
PR fortran/60526
* decl.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69741
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|NEW
Summary|forall arr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68746
--- Comment #4 from John David Anglin ---
Author: danglin
Date: Sun Feb 14 16:29:08 2016
New Revision: 233412
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=233412&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR fortran/68746
* gfortran.dg/read_dir.f90: Xfail o
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68746
John David Anglin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|hppa64-hp-hpux11.11 |hppa*-*-hpux*
Status|WAI
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69816
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69816
--- Comment #1 from Thomas Koenig ---
Author: tkoenig
Date: Sun Feb 14 15:13:39 2016
New Revision: 233411
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=233411&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2016-02-14 Thomas Koenig
PR fortran/60526
PR bootstr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60526
--- Comment #14 from Thomas Koenig ---
Author: tkoenig
Date: Sun Feb 14 15:13:39 2016
New Revision: 233411
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=233411&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2016-02-14 Thomas Koenig
PR fortran/60526
PR bootst
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69816
Bug ID: 69816
Summary: [4.9 Regression] r233410 breaks bootstrap
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: bootstrap
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69423
--- Comment #10 from Paul Thomas ---
Created attachment 37686
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37686&action=edit
Provisional patch for the PR
I have reworked the handling of deferred string function results to fix this
PR. Cl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69741
Nick changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Resolution|INVALID
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69741
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69815
Bug ID: 69815
Summary: Don't always use BLOCKS for front-end optimization
variables
Product: gcc
Version: 6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69741
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|critical|normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60526
--- Comment #13 from Thomas Koenig ---
Author: tkoenig
Date: Sun Feb 14 12:23:59 2016
New Revision: 233410
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=233410&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2016-02-14 Thomas Koenig
PR fortran/60526
* decl.c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69808
mgansser at alice dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66460
--- Comment #9 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
*** Bug 69812 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69812
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66460
--- Comment #8 from Markus Trippelsdorf ---
*** Bug 69814 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69814
Markus Trippelsdorf changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
61 matches
Mail list logo
