[Bug lto/99898] Possible LTO object incompatibility on gcc-10 branch

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99898 --- Comment #4 from Richard Biener --- The LTO minor saw a bump around Sep 10 last year already so the object files must be younger or LTO should complain. The specific assert that triggers isn't a sign of format divergence (it would be a very o

[Bug target/99905] [8/9/10/11 Regression] wrong code with -mno-mmx -mno-sse

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99905 Zdenek Sojka changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|wrong code with |[8/9/10/11 Regression]

[Bug target/99905] wrong code with -mgeneral-regs-only

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99905 --- Comment #2 from Zdenek Sojka --- (In reply to Martin Liška from comment #1) > > Probably present since -mgeneral-regs-only introduction. > > Confirmed that, it's since r7-928-gce3a16ff1f59e6db. Thank you for the bisection. If -mgeneral-regs

[Bug c++/99925] New: Missing 'inconsistent deduction for ‘auto’' error when using type-constraint placeholder

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99925 Bug ID: 99925 Summary: Missing 'inconsistent deduction for ‘auto’' error when using type-constraint placeholder Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED S

[Bug target/99905] wrong code with -mgeneral-regs-only

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99905 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2021-04-06 Ever confirmed|0

[Bug lto/99898] Possible LTO object incompatibility on gcc-10 branch

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99898 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c++/99901] [8/9/10/11 Regression] static const class var implemented with constexpr doesn't emit symbols in C++17 mode

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99901 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jason at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug tree-optimization/88975] ICE: Segmentation fault (in dominated_by_p)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88975 --- Comment #3 from Arseny Solokha --- gcc-11.0.1-alpha20210404 snapshot (g:c3d3bb0f03dbd02512ab46979088ee8e22520c24) accepts all three testcases w/o ICE. Is it a duplicate of PR99007?

[Bug c++/91241] [8/9/10 Regression] internal compiler error: symtab_node::verify failed

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91241 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Known to work||11.0 Summary|[8/9/10/11 Regre

[Bug target/99924] New: ICE in vect_schedule_slp_node, at tree-vect-slp.c:6040

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99924 Bug ID: 99924 Summary: ICE in vect_schedule_slp_node, at tree-vect-slp.c:6040 Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Compon

[Bug c++/91241] [8/9/10/11 Regression] internal compiler error: symtab_node::verify failed

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91241 --- Comment #14 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Jason Merrill : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:55f40d968b0bd3be4478a9481e829a99ee0fa04f commit r11-7998-g55f40d968b0bd3be4478a9481e829a99ee0fa04f Author: Jason Merrill Date: M

[Bug c++/99899] [11 Regression] ICE: in do_auto_deduction, at cp/pt.c:29630

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99899 Patrick Palka changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|ASSIGNED

[Bug c++/99899] [11 Regression] ICE: in do_auto_deduction, at cp/pt.c:29630

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99899 --- Comment #2 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Patrick Palka : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:66de517b1c1dd22df7914f8e9a083cd5a73adbe2 commit r11-7997-g66de517b1c1dd22df7914f8e9a083cd5a73adbe2 Author: Patrick Palka Date: Mo

[Bug c++/99901] [8/9/10/11 Regression] static const class var implemented with constexpr doesn't emit symbols in C++17 mode

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99901 Patrick Palka changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |8.5 Ever confirmed|0

[Bug c++/99923] New: Rejects valid if statement with default argument concept

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99923 Bug ID: 99923 Summary: Rejects valid if statement with default argument concept Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priori

[Bug fortran/99922] Bind(C) with assumed length character should work

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99922 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2021-04-06 Status|

[Bug c++/91241] [8/9/10/11 Regression] internal compiler error: symtab_node::verify failed

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91241 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jason at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug c++/86485] [8 Regression] "anonymous" maybe-uninitialized false positive with ternary operator

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86485 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Known to fail|9.0 | Known to work|

[Bug middle-end/85872] False positive for -Wmaybe-unitialized (compile-time limit)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85872 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added CC||msebor at gcc dot gnu.org Known to f

[Bug fortran/99922] New: Bind(C) with assumed length character should work

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99922 Bug ID: 99922 Summary: Bind(C) with assumed length character should work Product: gcc Version: 10.2.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component

[Bug target/99921] New: PowerPC xxeval has the wrong predicates

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99921 Bug ID: 99921 Summary: PowerPC xxeval has the wrong predicates Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: minor Priority: P3 Component: target

[Bug bootstrap/99920] New: [10 regression] ICE building gcc 10 on power 7 BE

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99920 Bug ID: 99920 Summary: [10 regression] ICE building gcc 10 on power 7 BE Product: gcc Version: 10.2.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component

[Bug middle-end/99883] A couple of minor misspellings

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99883 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug middle-end/24639] [meta-bug] bug to track all Wuninitialized issues

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24639 Bug 24639 depends on bug 85777, which changed state. Bug 85777 Summary: [8/9/10/11 Regression] -fsanitize=undefined makes a -Wmaybe-uninitialized warning disappear https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85777 What|Removed

[Bug sanitizer/85777] [8/9/10/11 Regression] -fsanitize=undefined makes a -Wmaybe-uninitialized warning disappear

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85777 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added CC||msebor at gcc dot gnu.org Resolut

[Bug c++/99795] [8/9/10/11 Regression] -Wnarrowing/-Woverflow false-negative in constant expression in undeduced context

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99795 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC|

[Bug c++/98810] [9/10 Regression] [C++20] ICE in tsubst_copy, at cp/pt.c:16771

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98810 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|ASSIGNED

[Bug c++/98481] [10 Regression] std::vector::size_type as return type gets tagged with abi:cxx11

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98481 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/95870] [8/9/10 Regression] ICE (segmentation fault) in most_general_template(), in gcc/cp/pt.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95870 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Known to work||11.0 Summary|[8/9/10/11 Regre

[Bug c++/98440] [9/10 Regression] Accepts ill-formed reinterpret_cast(1)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98440 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|[9/10/11 Regression]|[9/10 Regression] Accepts

[Bug c++/96311] [8/9/10 Regression] false positive for -Wunused-but-set-variable (const/constexpr identifier used in generic lambda)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96311 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Known to work||11.0 Summary|[8/9/10/11 Regre

[Bug c++/96311] [8/9/10/11 Regression] false positive for -Wunused-but-set-variable (const/constexpr identifier used in generic lambda)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96311 --- Comment #6 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Jason Merrill : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:b07dd9b0d0e501a0083da79e2bca17041c007ec8 commit r11-7995-gb07dd9b0d0e501a0083da79e2bca17041c007ec8 Author: Jason Merrill Date: Mo

[Bug c++/98440] [9/10/11 Regression] Accepts ill-formed reinterpret_cast(1)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98440 --- Comment #2 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Jason Merrill : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:07f56824fd4da14a48030e698c8eb58de951c741 commit r11-7994-g07f56824fd4da14a48030e698c8eb58de951c741 Author: Jason Merrill Date: Mo

[Bug rtl-optimization/12754] Faulty register allocation under certain circumstances

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12754 Stafford Horne changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|FIXED |WONTFIX

[Bug rtl-optimization/12754] Faulty register allocation under certain circumstances

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12754 Stafford Horne changed: What|Removed |Added Status|SUSPENDED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug tree-optimization/99919] [9/10/11 Regression] bogus -Wmaybe-uninitialized with a _Bool bit-field

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99919 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||99918 --- Comment #1 from Martin Sebor -

[Bug rtl-optimization/12754] Faulty register allocation under certain circumstances

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12754 Stafford Horne changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |shorne at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug tree-optimization/99918] [9/10/11 Regression] suboptimal code for bool bitfield tests

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99918 --- Comment #4 from Martin Sebor --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1) > This comes down to lowering bitfields too soon. > my bet it will happen even integer bitfields will have a problem. Yes, unsigned bit-fields suffer the same probl

[Bug tree-optimization/85301] bitfield check causes maybe-uninitialized warning

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85301 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed|2018-04-09 00:00:00 |2021-4-5 Known to fail|

[Bug tree-optimization/99919] New: [9/10/11 Regression] bogus -Wmaybe-uninitialized with a _Bool bit-field

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99919 Bug ID: 99919 Summary: [9/10/11 Regression] bogus -Wmaybe-uninitialized with a _Bool bit-field Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug tree-optimization/99918] [9/10/11 Regression] suboptimal code for bool bitfield tests

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99918 --- Comment #3 from Martin Sebor --- This only seems to affect C _Bool bit-fields and not C++ bool.

[Bug tree-optimization/99918] [9/10/11 Regression] suboptimal code for bool bitfield tests

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99918 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Known to fail||10.2.0, 11.0, 6.3.0, 7.0.1,

[Bug tree-optimization/99918] suboptimal code for bool bitfield tests

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99918 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||missed-optimization --- Comment #1 from

[Bug tree-optimization/99918] New: suboptimal code for bool bitfield tests

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99918 Bug ID: 99918 Summary: suboptimal code for bool bitfield tests Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: tree-optim

[Bug c++/96311] [8/9/10/11 Regression] false positive for -Wunused-but-set-variable (const/constexpr identifier used in generic lambda)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96311 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned a

[Bug d/99917] gcc/d/dmd/mtype.c:5223: missing call to va_end ?

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99917 --- Comment #1 from Iain Buclaw --- (In reply to David Binderman from comment #0) > trunk.git/gcc/d/dmd/mtype.c:5223:30: error: va_list 'ap' was opened but not > closed by va_end(). [va_end_missing] > > Source code is > > va_list ap; >

[Bug c++/99599] [11 Regression] Concepts requirement falsely reporting cyclic dependency, breaks tag_invoke pattern

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99599 --- Comment #4 from the_gamester28 at msn dot com --- (In reply to Jason Merrill from comment #2) > (In reply to the_gamester28 from comment #0) > > It seems that the template requirements of invoke_tag(bar_tag, int) are > > considered while evalu

[Bug c++/98440] [9/10/11 Regression] Accepts ill-formed reinterpret_cast(1)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98440 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jason at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug c++/95317] [8/9/10 Regression] ICE on valid C++14 code, in tsubst_copy, at cp/pt.c:15649

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95317 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Known to work||11.0 Summary|[8/9/10/11 Regre

[Bug c++/95317] [8/9/10/11 Regression] ICE on valid C++14 code, in tsubst_copy, at cp/pt.c:15649

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95317 --- Comment #3 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Jason Merrill : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:9f4c41147a41d08a74990eafe69a1064a3c13435 commit r11-7993-g9f4c41147a41d08a74990eafe69a1064a3c13435 Author: Jason Merrill Date: Mo

[Bug c++/95870] [8/9/10/11 Regression] ICE (segmentation fault) in most_general_template(), in gcc/cp/pt.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95870 --- Comment #8 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Jason Merrill : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:62d60246e53778db6ee613377dd013ba4b264968 commit r11-7992-g62d60246e53778db6ee613377dd013ba4b264968 Author: Jason Merrill Date: Mo

[Bug c++/99066] [8/9/10 Regression] non-weak definition emitted for explicit instantiation declaration

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99066 --- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely --- (In reply to Jason Merrill from comment #3) > r104041, yes. Bizarre that this went unnoticed for over 15 years. Very surprising, isn't it!

[Bug d/99917] New: gcc/d/dmd/mtype.c:5223: missing call to va_end ?

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99917 Bug ID: 99917 Summary: gcc/d/dmd/mtype.c:5223: missing call to va_end ? Product: gcc Version: unknown Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component

[Bug middle-end/24639] [meta-bug] bug to track all Wuninitialized issues

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24639 Bug 24639 depends on bug 85233, which changed state. Bug 85233 Summary: Incorrect -Wmaybe-uninitialized with -fpartial-inlining -finline-small-functions https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85233 What|Removed

[Bug ipa/85233] Incorrect -Wmaybe-uninitialized with -fpartial-inlining -finline-small-functions

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85233 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Known to fail||7.3.0, 8.3.0, 9.2.0 Status|NE

[Bug middle-end/84078] false positive for -Wmaybe-uninitialized with __asm__

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84078 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Known to fail||10.2.0, 11.0, 4.1.0, 4.8.4,

[Bug c++/99899] [11 Regression] ICE: in do_auto_deduction, at cp/pt.c:29630

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99899 Patrick Palka changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org Ever confi

[Bug c++/99380] [modules] Unexpected MODULE-EXPORT request when partially preprocessing header unit

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99380 Nathan Sidwell changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug c++/99380] [modules] Unexpected MODULE-EXPORT request when partially preprocessing header unit

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99380 --- Comment #1 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Nathan Sidwell : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:dd6f588a7b8878d677af51ff4d1c1e3f9f6f40db commit r11-7989-gdd6f588a7b8878d677af51ff4d1c1e3f9f6f40db Author: Nathan Sidwell Date:

[Bug analyzer/99906] [11 Regression] ICE: SIGSEGV in maybe_reconstruct_from_def_stmt with -fanalyzer

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99906 David Malcolm changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug analyzer/99886] Delay loop in -fanalyzer seen on gcc.dg/analyzer/malloc-1.c with -fanalyzer-verbosity=0

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99886 David Malcolm changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|ASSIGNED

[Bug analyzer/99906] [11 Regression] ICE: SIGSEGV in maybe_reconstruct_from_def_stmt with -fanalyzer

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99906 --- Comment #3 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by David Malcolm : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:7d8f4240c94e2e7643ac13cda1fdd0bb6ca3a3fb commit r11-7988-g7d8f4240c94e2e7643ac13cda1fdd0bb6ca3a3fb Author: David Malcolm Date: Mo

[Bug analyzer/99886] Delay loop in -fanalyzer seen on gcc.dg/analyzer/malloc-1.c with -fanalyzer-verbosity=0

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99886 --- Comment #2 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by David Malcolm : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:69b66ff02353a87585329bb3cf4ac20d6dee1b16 commit r11-7987-g69b66ff02353a87585329bb3cf4ac20d6dee1b16 Author: David Malcolm Date: Mo

[Bug c++/95870] [8/9/10/11 Regression] ICE (segmentation fault) in most_general_template(), in gcc/cp/pt.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95870 --- Comment #7 from Viktor Rosendahl --- Thanks for your message. I am on vacation. I will be working again on 6th of April 2021.

[Bug c++/95870] [8/9/10/11 Regression] ICE (segmentation fault) in most_general_template(), in gcc/cp/pt.c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95870 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org Assig

[Bug c++/99869] [11 Regression] ICE: in do_auto_deduction, at cp/pt.c:29620

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99869 Patrick Palka changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug c++/99201] [8/9/10 Regression] ICE in tsubst_copy, at cp/pt.c:16581 since r8-7613-g1456e764105702a0

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99201 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|[8/9/10/11 Regression] ICE |[8/9/10 Regression] ICE in

[Bug c++/99066] [8/9/10 Regression] non-weak definition emitted for explicit instantiation declaration

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99066 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|[8/9/10/11 Regression] |[8/9/10 Regression] |n

[Bug c++/99066] [8/9/10/11 Regression] non-weak definition emitted for explicit instantiation declaration

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99066 --- Comment #4 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Jason Merrill : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:bd89b8fe9efbdf0a95d827553d1a84fd3cefaa16 commit r11-7986-gbd89b8fe9efbdf0a95d827553d1a84fd3cefaa16 Author: Jason Merrill Date: Su

[Bug c++/99066] [8/9/10/11 Regression] non-weak definition emitted for explicit instantiation declaration

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99066 --- Comment #3 from Jason Merrill --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #2) > Perhaps caused by PR23691 changes? r104041, yes. Bizarre that this went unnoticed for over 15 years.

[Bug c++/99201] [8/9/10/11 Regression] ICE in tsubst_copy, at cp/pt.c:16581 since r8-7613-g1456e764105702a0

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99201 --- Comment #7 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Jason Merrill : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a99a7b0afe9a1f6f866e25b8572856ae8c1d3f8d commit r11-7985-ga99a7b0afe9a1f6f866e25b8572856ae8c1d3f8d Author: Jason Merrill Date: Su

[Bug c++/99916] New: ICE Segmentation fault when erroneous structured bindings appears in requires-clause

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99916 Bug ID: 99916 Summary: ICE Segmentation fault when erroneous structured bindings appears in requires-clause Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Sever

[Bug d/99914] d: Template symbols not overridable by normal symbols

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99914 Iain Buclaw changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug d/99914] d: Template symbols not overridable by normal symbols

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99914 --- Comment #1 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Iain Buclaw : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:76a7e7e706ac4c01cead3c6514322aaad88f9a63 commit r11-7983-g76a7e7e706ac4c01cead3c6514322aaad88f9a63 Author: Iain Buclaw Date: Sun Ma

[Bug c++/99861] [modules] ICE in hashtab_chk_error

e <https://gcc.gnu.org/bugs/> for instructions. g++ (GCC) 11.0.1 20210405 (experimental) Copyright (C) 2021 Free Software Foundation, Inc. This is free software; see the source for copying conditions. There is NO warranty; not even for MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.

[Bug c++/99915] New: [modules] ICE in write_location

g report, with preprocessed source if appropriate. Please include the complete backtrace with any bug report. See <https://gcc.gnu.org/bugs/> for instructions. g++ (GCC) 11.0.1 20210405 (experimental) Copyright (C) 2021 Free Software Foundation, Inc. This is free software; see the sour

[Bug d/99914] New: d: Template symbols not overridable by normal symbols

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99914 Bug ID: 99914 Summary: d: Template symbols not overridable by normal symbols Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Compone

[Bug target/99913] GCC11 fails to build for MinGW-w64 for Windows 32-bit

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99913 --- Comment #3 from Brecht Sanders --- Just to clarify: libwinpthread is built as part of the GCC build against MinGW-w64. MinGW-w64 also already has a libwinpthread (including libwinpthread-1.dll which can be found in the PATH).

[Bug target/99913] GCC11 fails to build for MinGW-w64 for Windows 32-bit

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99913 --- Comment #2 from Brecht Sanders --- By the time I get to that error the build process already generated these files: - mingw-w64/mingw/lib/libwinpthread.a - mingw-w64/mingw/lib/libwinpthread.dll.a - mingw-w64/mingw/lib/libwinpthread.la Howeve

[Bug target/99913] GCC11 fails to build for MinGW-w64 for Windows 32-bit

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99913 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- I Noticed: --enable-threads=posix and the error message is: D:\prog\winlibs32_stage\mingw32\i686-w64-mingw32\bin\ld.exe: R:/winlibs32_stage/gcc-11-20210404/build_mingw/gcc/libgcc_eh.a(unwind-dw2.o): in func

[Bug c/99913] New: GCC11 fails to build for MinGW-w64 for Windows 32-bit

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99913 Bug ID: 99913 Summary: GCC11 fails to build for MinGW-w64 for Windows 32-bit Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Compone