https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105403
Geoff Keating changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||geoffk at geoffk dot org
--- Comment
--- Comment #8 from geoffk at geoffk dot org 2008-03-01 04:05 ---
Subject: Re: static object mangling conflicts with extern object
On 29/02/2008, at 5:57 AM, mueller at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> extern "C" void abort();
> extern "C" { static int i; }
--- Comment #17 from geoffk at geoffk dot org 2008-02-13 07:50 ---
Subject: Re: [4.3 Regression] gcc.c-torture/execute/va-arg-25.c:32: internal
compiler error: in expand_call, at calls.c:2785
On 12/02/2008, at 10:41 PM, hjl dot tools at gmail dot com wrote:
> --- Comment
--- Comment #15 from geoffk at geoffk dot org 2008-02-13 05:54 ---
Subject: Re: [4.3 Regression] gcc.c-torture/execute/va-arg-25.c:32: internal
compiler error: in expand_call, at calls.c:2785
STACK_BOUNDARY
>>
> is more or less "natural" hardware stack boundary, wh
--- Comment #13 from geoffk at geoffk dot org 2008-02-12 22:43 ---
Subject: Re: [4.3 Regression] gcc.c-torture/execute/va-arg-25.c:32: internal
compiler error: in expand_call, at calls.c:2785
On 12/02/2008, at 7:46 AM, hjl dot tools at gmail dot com wrote:
> --- Comment #10 f
--- Comment #39 from geoffk at geoffk dot org 2007-11-05 03:33 ---
Subject: Re: [4.3 Regression] typeinfo name referenced in ... defined in
discarded section
On 04/11/2007, at 7:01 PM, hjl at lucon dot org wrote:
>> - Won't this cause the global variable to be discarde
--- Comment #35 from geoffk at geoffk dot org 2007-11-05 02:47 ---
Subject: Re: [4.3 Regression] typeinfo name referenced in ... defined in
discarded section
On 04/11/2007, at 4:22 PM, hjl at lucon dot org wrote:
> --- Comment #33 from hjl at lucon dot org 2007-11-05 00
--- Comment #32 from geoffk at geoffk dot org 2007-11-05 00:14 ---
Subject: Re: [4.3 Regression] typeinfo name referenced in ... defined in
discarded section
On 04/11/2007, at 6:40 AM, hjl at lucon dot org wrote:
> --- Comment #31 from hjl at lucon dot org 2007-11-04 14
--- Comment #30 from geoffk at geoffk dot org 2007-11-04 07:50 ---
Subject: Re: [4.3 Regression] typeinfo name referenced in ... defined in
discarded section
On 03/11/2007, at 7:21 AM, hjl at lucon dot org wrote:
> Local symbols should only be referenced within the same comdat gr
--- Comment #27 from geoffk at geoffk dot org 2007-11-03 07:21 ---
Subject: Re: [4.3 Regression] typeinfo name referenced in ... defined in
discarded section
On 30/10/2007, at 9:03 PM, amodra at bigpond dot net dot au wrote:
> --- Comment #26 from amodra at bigpond dot net
--- Comment #23 from geoffk at geoffk dot org 2007-10-30 19:32 ---
Subject: Re: [4.3 Regression] typeinfo name referenced in ... defined in
discarded section
On 30/10/2007, at 12:12 PM, hjl at lucon dot org wrote:
> The problem is "typeinfo for (anonymous namespace)::t&quo
--- Comment #21 from geoffk at geoffk dot org 2007-10-30 19:04 ---
Subject: Re: [4.3 Regression] typeinfo name referenced in ... defined in
discarded section
On 30/10/2007, at 11:44 AM, rguenther at suse dot de wrote:
> I see. So where is the bug here? We obviously see applicat
--- Comment #18 from geoffk at geoffk dot org 2007-10-30 18:35 ---
Subject: Re: [4.3 Regression] typeinfo name referenced in ... defined in
discarded section
On 30/10/2007, at 11:07 AM, rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> --- Comment #16 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot
--- Comment #17 from geoffk at geoffk dot org 2007-10-30 18:31 ---
Subject: Re: [4.3 Regression] typeinfo name referenced in ... defined in
discarded section
On 30/10/2007, at 9:53 AM, gcc at magfr dot user dot lysator dot liu
dot se wrote:
>>> If that is the case, wh
--- Comment #13 from geoffk at geoffk dot org 2006-09-02 05:31 ---
Subject: Re: [4.0/4.1/4.2 Regression] -O3 -g crashes sometimes when using
may_alias and structs
On 01/09/2006, at 2:53 PM, mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> --- Comment #11 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu
--- Comment #5 from geoffk at geoffk dot org 2006-08-21 22:06 ---
Subject: Re: [4.2 Regression] ICE in rtl_for_decl_init, at dwarf2out.c
On 20/08/2006, at 9:32 PM, pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> --- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-21
>
--- Comment #93 from geoffk at geoffk dot org 2006-04-04 00:23 ---
Subject: Re: libstdc++ headers should have pop/push of the visibility around
the declarations
On 03/04/2006, at 4:57 PM, pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> --- Comment #92 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot
--- Comment #4 from geoffk at geoffk dot org 2005-12-23 23:33 ---
Subject: Re: New: zero-initialized constants are place in .bss
"drepper at redhat dot com" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> const struct foo f;
>
> The compiler will mark the variable f in .bss
--- Comment #5 from geoffk at geoffk dot org 2005-11-30 01:01 ---
Subject: Re: aliases, including weakref, break alias analysis
On 29/11/2005, at 5:55 AM, aoliva at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> Make it a weak alias, then.
A weak alias is still an alias and still not supported
--- Comment #3 from geoffk at geoffk dot org 2005-11-28 19:22 ---
Subject: Re: aliases, including weakref, break alias analysis
On 28/11/2005, at 10:40 AM, aoliva at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> --- Comment #2 from aoliva at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-28
>
--- Comment #28 from geoffk at geoffk dot org 2005-11-19 04:40 ---
Subject: Re: Can't link 64-bit shared libraries with Xcode 2.1
On 18/11/2005, at 6:42 PM, lucier at math dot purdue dot edu wrote:
> --- Comment #27 from lucier at math dot purdue dot edu
> 2005-
--- Comment #9 from geoffk at geoffk dot org 2005-11-18 19:39 ---
Subject: Re: visibility attributes on namespace scope
On 17/11/2005, at 10:15 PM, jason at redhat dot com wrote:
> --- Comment #8 from jason at redhat dot com 2005-11-18 06:15
> ---
> Su
--- Comment #84 from geoffk at geoffk dot org 2005-11-01 04:30 ---
Subject: Re: libstdc++ headers should have pop/push of the visibility around
the declarations
On 31/10/2005, at 7:59 PM, bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> Geoff, it's not as simple as just marking throwab
--- Comment #81 from geoffk at geoffk dot org 2005-10-31 23:29 ---
Subject: Re: libstdc++ headers should have pop/push of the visibility around
the declarations
On 31/10/2005, at 2:45 PM, mueller at kde dot org wrote:
> --- Comment #80 from mueller at kde dot org 2005-10-31
--- Comment #79 from geoffk at geoffk dot org 2005-10-31 22:14 ---
Subject: Re: libstdc++ headers should have pop/push of the visibility around
the declarations
On 31/10/2005, at 10:37 AM, ismail at uludag dot org dot tr wrote:
> --- Comment #78 from ismail at uludag dot
--- Additional Comments From geoffk at geoffk dot org 2005-09-16 00:01
---
Subject: Re: UCNs not recognized in identifiers (c++/c99)
On 15/09/2005, at 3:53 PM, joseph at codesourcery dot com wrote:
> Yes, "spelling" is meant in terms of the source code characters.
&g
--- Additional Comments From geoffk at geoffk dot org 2005-09-10 20:34
---
Subject: Re: [4.0/4.1 Regression] OpenBSD's zic.c causes g++ but not gcc to
segfault
On 09/09/2005, at 9:56 PM, pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> So it is little harder to fix than I had
--- Additional Comments From geoffk at geoffk dot org 2005-08-01 04:31
---
Subject: Re: Members of anonymous namespaces should be 'static'
On 31/07/2005, at 7:24 PM, cpence at gmail dot com wrote:
> Three months later, any movement on this bug? How is the PCH code
--- Additional Comments From geoffk at geoffk dot org 2005-05-30 15:37
---
Subject: Re: [4.1 Regression] Powerpc atomic builtins missing PPC405 errata
On 29/05/2005, at 6:40 PM, dje at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> This is a regression because libstdc++ previously worked correc
29 matches
Mail list logo
