https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99457
--- Comment #4 from Jay ---
I thought I stepped far enough, as I showed.
I didn't try current, granted.
And yeah, I don't need -gstabs+ and have now switched to -g.
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: jay.krell at cornell dot edu
Target Milestone: ---
gcc/gdb -gstabs+ is buggy.
Could be either, I didn't investigate.
The codegen is correct.
That's ok, I didn't really need it, I'll use regular -g.
$ cat 1.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88352
--- Comment #2 from Jay ---
The linked bug was amd64. This is x86.
I'm not sure they are the same. Maybe.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64384
Jay changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jay.krell at cornell dot edu
--- Comment #6 from
Priority: P3
Component: c
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: jay.krell at cornell dot edu
Target Milestone: ---
typedef struct { double d; } Struct;
typedef union { double d; } Union;
Struct f1 ()
{
const Struct res = {3.0};
return res
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84631
--- Comment #5 from Jay ---
I confirmed.
Here is what you can.
Build out of tree, of course.
cd fixincludes
make check
while it is printing "fixed...", press control-c
ls tests/inc
You will see a directory named "*".
Creating this works on Mac
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84631
Jay changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED
Resolution|WONTFIX
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84631
--- Comment #3 from Jay ---
The star isn't matching anything, so it tries to create star.
I did set -ex to debug but I don't that is causing the problem.
Perhaps on other systems it does actually create star, but nobody noticed?
I'll have to ch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84631
--- Comment #2 from Jay ---
Err oops let me look again. Failure must be something else then.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84628
--- Comment #8 from Jay ---
Aha, kinda the same thing, but before or after analysis.
And this “deprecated” somewhat matches msvc - I was wondering about that but
didn’t see it.
It’d be nice to be able to customize the deprecated message but hope
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: jay.krell at cornell dot edu
Target Milestone: ---
make check in fixincludes fails, seemingly due to "*" in directory names.
This is on WSL (Windows Subsystem
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84628
--- Comment #6 from Jay ---
Misplaced comment:
But, the thing is, because optimization can remove the use of such functions,
people are now advocating that we noinline along with the attribute, which
hypothetically is unwarranted damage. Noinline
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84629
--- Comment #4 from Jay ---
-disable-multilib fixed the errors.
I didn't watch for the warnings.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44002
--- Comment #4 from Jay ---
Incorrect bug.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84628
--- Comment #5 from Jay ---
I know. We just noticed and were surprised. It isn't clear if this is what
users would expect or not. Warn because they wrote code that "merely looks
bad", or only if the compiler decides after analysis that it really
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44002
--- Comment #3 from Jay ---
But, the thing is, because optimization can remove the use of such functions,
people are now advocating that we noinline along with the attribute, which
hypothetically is unwarranted damage. Noinline being a partial di
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84628
--- Comment #3 from Jay ---
The original case said something about "localalias" in the error, so aliases
don't seem to address it. I can dig that up probably.
Shouldn't it warn for:
if (0)
banned_function()
?
I believe we want it to.
You kn
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84629
--- Comment #3 from Jay ---
This is ubuntu xenial I think, on WSL.
Which doesn't have multi-arch.
So I'll try configure -disable-multilib.
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: jay.krell at cornell dot edu
CC: dodji at gcc dot gnu.org, dvyukov at gcc dot gnu.org,
jakub at gcc dot gnu.org, kcc at gcc dot gnu.org, marxin at
gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
^
/s
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84628
--- Comment #1 from Jay ---
Also occurs with git trunk ef8d0c5bff3c11a5d67617df2f43775f7a26fad2 8.0.1
20180228.
Priority: P3
Component: c
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: jay.krell at cornell dot edu
Target Milestone: ---
This code should not error.
It is derived from real world code.
$ cat object.c
#define ERROR __attribute__ ((__error__ ("do not
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45928
--- Comment #4 from Jay ---
Sorry wrong thread.
On Fri, Jul 21, 2017 at 4:09 PM Jay wrote:
> The ifndef pid_t makes it a little unconvincing. I'll see if I can find my
> "sysroot".
>
> On Fri, Jul 21, 2017 at 9:42 AM egallager at gcc dot gnu.o
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45928
--- Comment #3 from Jay ---
The ifndef pid_t makes it a little unconvincing. I'll see if I can find my
"sysroot".
On Fri, Jul 21, 2017 at 9:42 AM egallager at gcc dot gnu.org <
gcc-bugzi...@gcc.gnu.org> wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/sho
: bootstrap
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: jay.krell at cornell dot edu
Target Milestone: ---
MacOSX Yosemite 10.10.4
jair:~ jay$ uname -a
Darwin jair.local 14.4.0 Darwin Kernel Version 14.4.0: Thu May 28 11:35:04
PDT 2015; root:xnu-2782.30.5~1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67183
--- Comment #3 from Jay ---
https://github.com/modula3/cm3/commit/14d5e667e19abaab679b52bc8fd35a4e38073330
is a simple patch against 4.7 that establishes a partial ordering,
separating the indirect functions from the indirect data,
and appears t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67183
--- Comment #2 from Jay ---
er, three traversals.
Also, ideally, nothing is ever output in hash order.
At least not to assembly source and objects. It might be unavoidable for final
executables.
i.e. adding one randomly named function should no
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67183
--- Comment #1 from Jay ---
It turns out, this looks easy to "fix" on the gcc side.
See machopic_finish.
Have it run two traversla instead of one. The first editing stubs, the second
non-lazy pointers.
: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: jay.krell at cornell dot edu
Target Milestone: ---
Darwin stub vs. non_lazy pointer ordering incompatible with clang assembler.
Incorrect code results when targeting 32bit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66984
--- Comment #2 from Jay ---
1 please be sure that dividing the most negative number by -1 "works".
Perhaps just don't optimize anything with negstive numbers.
2 I suggest that gcc's C/C++ frontends expose these other forms of division,
for the
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46333
--- Comment #27 from Jay ---
The patch looks very very reasonable
imho. I had a few reasonable patches.
- Jay
On Jan 29, 2014, at 9:25 AM, "glisse at gcc dot gnu.org"
wrote:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46333
>
> --- Comment
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56703
--- Comment #3 from Jay 2013-03-23 23:24:55 UTC
---
gmp/mpfr/mpc are in-tree
Notice that it has gotten past the first stage..so I didn't bother double
checking what my bootstrap compiler was..though gcc/g++ 3.x is in $PATH.
Very simple
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56704
Bug #: 56704
Summary: rlim_t problem gcc 4.8.0 on Solaris 2.10/sparc?
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56703
--- Comment #1 from Jay 2013-03-23 23:12:03 UTC
---
I see that the check for any function involves a cast of its type -- i.e. it
isn't customized per-function, so a change isn't trivial.
For now I have removed strstr and strsignal from s
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56703
Bug #: 56703
Summary: problems with strsignal and maybe strstr due to
varying const on return type
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56362
--- Comment #2 from Jay 2013-02-21 08:07:15 UTC
---
Looking back at other data I have..this has something to do with configure
-enable-checking..but I don't know exactly what.
I am *guessing* that the signedness of the bitfield ref and t
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56363
--- Comment #7 from Jay 2013-02-20 08:51:49 UTC
---
Here is the "successful experiment", where I changed the code to operate on all
the div variants. Of course I am NOT suggesting this change be made. Nor is it
100% conclusive. But it is very mu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56363
--- Comment #6 from Jay 2013-02-19 21:52:31 UTC
---
> should pass op0 and op1 to the fold_build2_loc call, instead of arg0/arg1
I don't disagree, but I really I don't know.
Clearly that means almost but not exactly the same thing.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56363
--- Comment #4 from Jay 2013-02-19 16:18:02 UTC
---
ah, here is more info; I reported the bug better years ago but it was never
looked at:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46679
There I don't claim bad code, but a failu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56363
--- Comment #3 from Jay 2013-02-18 20:50:44 UTC
---
(In reply to comment #2)
> call? Anyway, it would be better to see a testcase.
I'm not sure I can construct one in C.
It might be too painful for you to take what I have -- a genera
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56364
Bug #: 56364
Summary: autoconf compiler switches are also used to link and
they can fail (-fno-rtti -fno-exceptions Solaris
cc/ld)
Classification: Unclassified
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56363
Bug #: 56363
Summary: over aggressive division folding ignores sign
conversion
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56362
Bug #: 56362
Summary: bitfield refs over-optimized?
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56361
Bug #: 56361
Summary: assertion failure passing structs w/o fields by value
on sparc64
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.2
Status: UNCO
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45351
--- Comment #10 from Jay 2011-07-19 15:58:04 UTC
---
>> Is there no annotation in /usr/include/whatever.h to get the required
>> alignment? Maybe that gcc doesn't-but-maybe-should understand?
>
> No, the section I cited is all there is. No idea
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45351
--- Comment #8 from Jay 2011-07-19 15:15:46 UTC
---
Is there no annotation in /usr/include/whatever.h to get the required
alignment? Maybe that gcc doesn't-but-maybe-should understand?
- Jay (phone)
On Jul 19, 2011, at 7:33 AM, "ro at gcc dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45345
--- Comment #6 from Jay 2011-05-28 19:47:42 UTC
---
No -- as in this, this isn't unused, ought not be deprecated.
You mentioned 32bit mips/a.out -- sure, maybe that is unused.
I assume a.out is almost unused across the board.
But 64bit mips/elf
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45345
--- Comment #4 from Jay 2011-05-28 19:20:51 UTC
---
No -- this is mips64. OpenBSD uses it -- loongson.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48747
Summary: Darwin/MacOSX 10.5 fixincludes make check => complex.h
missing
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Comp
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46597
--- Comment #1 from Jay 2010-12-28 13:50:06 UTC
---
I put #define ENABLE_CHECKING_GCC_VERSION ((GCC_VERSION > 3003) ||
(!defined(__cplusplus) && (GCC_VERSION > 2007)))
in include/ansidecl.h after #define GCC_VERSION and I && this with the #if
FO
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46861
--- Comment #5 from Jay 2010-12-11 09:40:39 UTC
---
No problem with 4.4.5 either.
j...@alphalinux:~$ $HOME/gcc-4.4.5/bin/gcc -v
Using built-in specs.
Target: alphaev5-unknown-linux-gnu
Configured with: /home/jay/src/gcc-4.4.5/configure -prefix=/
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46861
--- Comment #4 from Jay 2010-12-11 08:47:22 UTC
---
It appears to also be ok in 4.3.5.
j...@alphalinux:~$ $HOME/gcc-4.3.5/bin/gcc -v
Using built-in specs.
Target: alphaev5-unknown-linux-gnu
Configured with: /home/jay/src/gcc-4.3.5/configure -pr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46861
--- Comment #2 from Jay 2010-12-09 11:21:35 UTC
---
Right, I already reported: no problem with 4.5.1.
4.2.4 is what Debian 5.0 has though.
I'll stick with my workaround.
I can try 4.3.x, 4.4.x if there is interest (i.e. in fixing them if they are
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46861
Summary: alpha gcc 4.2 -fPIC visibility hidden => gp-relative
relocation against dynamic symbol
Product: gcc
Version: 4.2.4
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46679
Jay changed:
What|Removed |Added
Version|4.5.1 |4.6.0
--- Comment #1 from Jay 2010-12-02 09:08:49
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46681
--- Comment #3 from Jay 2010-11-27 01:39:30 UTC
---
no luck with ulimit -- I should have known since it is mmap
trying w/o -disable-bootstra
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46681
--- Comment #2 from Jay 2010-11-27 01:14:57 UTC
---
Trying again with ulimit -d unlimited.
I wonder if something like can/should be automated, like with some wrapper
executable.
Notice I'm using -enable-checking.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46681
--- Comment #1 from Jay 2010-11-27 01:09:47 UTC
---
Actually running make again doesn't fix it.
And machine is nearly single-tasking at the moment.
I'll try without -disable-bootstrap.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46681
Summary: insn-recog.c is too taxing on bootstrap compiler
(Apple gcc 4.0.1)
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46679
Summary: fold_binary changes types in divisionm breaking
configure -enable-checking
Product: gcc
Version: 4.5.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46618
Summary: UNKNOWN_LOCATION => bus error
Product: gcc
Version: 4.5.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: debug
AssignedTo: unassig...@gcc.gnu.o
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46597
Summary: configure -enable-checking=... -enable-build-with-cxx
and bootstrap is g++ 3.3 hit minor problem
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46333
--- Comment #19 from Jay 2010-11-08 11:50:35 UTC
---
Hey, g++ 4.0 doesn't even like all of the code.
You have to try "all targets" to uncover some of it.
target=alpha-dec-vms:
g++ -c -g -O2 -DIN_GCC -DCROSS_DIRECTORY_STRUCTURE -W -Wall -Ww
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46334
--- Comment #4 from Jay 2010-11-08 01:10:25 UTC
---
another, this is an older Darwin/powerpc machine, using some version of g++
http://hudson.modula3.com:8080/job/cm3-current-m3cc-PPC_DARWIN/93/consoleFull
g++ -g -DIN_GCC -W -Wall -Wwrite
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46333
--- Comment #18 from Jay 2010-11-08 00:57:29 UTC
---
more gcc_unreachable and then functions not returning, slightly 4.5.1 with Sun
CC (C++):
see
http://hudson.modula3.com:8080/job/cm3-current-m3cc-I386_SOLARIS-opencsw-current10x/105/console
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46334
--- Comment #3 from Jay 2010-11-07 23:10:50 UTC
---
jkr...@login [login]:~/src > ssh current10s
Last login: Sun Nov 7 23:09:51 2010 from login.bo.opencs
Sun Microsystems Inc. SunOS 5.10 Generic January 2005
-bash-4.1$ cd obj
-bash-4.1$ mk
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46334
--- Comment #2 from Jay 2010-11-07 23:08:57 UTC
---
Created attachment 22316
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=22316
libcpp config.log
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46334
--- Comment #1 from Jay 2010-11-07 23:08:17 UTC
---
Created attachment 22315
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=22315
toplevel config.log
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46333
Jay changed:
What|Removed |Added
Version|4.5.1 |4.6.0
--- Comment #17 from Jay 2010-11-07 23:01:14
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46333
--- Comment #16 from Jay 2010-11-07 04:20:47 UTC
---
I went with renaming the member to gen_lowerpart_, with underscore at the end.
There are no references to it except for the macro, it appears.
-bash-4.1$ CC -V
CC: Sun C++ 5.9 SunOS_sparc 2007/
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46333
--- Comment #15 from Jay 2010-11-07 04:13:30 UTC
---
hm..or maybe the Sun CC recurses here?
rtl.h:#define gen_lowpart rtl_hooks.gen_lowpart
maybe #undef gen_lowpower and use rtl_hooks.gen_lowpart?
or rename the member to gen_lowpower_hook?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46333
--- Comment #14 from Jay 2010-11-07 04:03:13 UTC
---
../../gcc-4.5/gcc/combine.c", line 6561: Error: Unexpected type name
"rtl_hooks" encountered.
../../gcc-4.5/gcc/combine.c", line 6561: Error: Unexpected type name
"rtl_hooks" encountered.
so c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46333
--- Comment #13 from Jay 2010-11-07 02:04:14 UTC
---
gmpn_add/sub/cmp were because I have drastically slashed mpc/mpfr/gmp
dependency, and optimizations off here. That is fixed.
Now I can compile/link our cc1 analog!
That's all we use.
I can mayb
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46333
--- Comment #12 from Jay 2010-11-07 01:37:15 UTC
---
Huh, maybe enum bitfields are legal C++?
#if defined(__cplusplus)
#define ENUM_BITFIELD(TYPE, NAME, SIZE) enum TYPE NAME : SIZE
seems to work, so can go back to the 1 parameter version, and
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46333
--- Comment #11 from Jay 2010-11-07 01:19:03 UTC
---
fyi, even with modern g++ 4.0, there are many warnings, e.g.:
./../gcc-4.5/gcc/postreload.c: In function ‘void reload_cse_regs_1(rtx_def*)’:
../../gcc-4.5/gcc/postreload.c:199: warning: passin
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46333
--- Comment #10 from Jay 2010-11-07 01:10:56 UTC
---
Undefined first referenced
symbol in file
__gmpn_add
/home/jkrell/dev2/cm3/m3-sys/m3cc/SOLsun/./gmp/.libs/libgmp.a(ad
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46333
--- Comment #9 from Jay 2010-11-07 00:50:02 UTC
---
Here is an example that occurs many times, warning only:
extern "C" { void F1(void); }
void (*F2)(void) = F1;
-bash-4.1$ /usr/bin/CC -c $HOME/1.cpp
"/home/jkrell/1.cpp", line 5: Warning (Anac
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46333
--- Comment #8 from Jay 2010-11-07 00:30:29 UTC
---
an example of the gcc_unreachable problem that I don't think I caused:
"../../gcc-4.5/gcc/targhooks.c", line 85: Error:
"default_legitimate_address_p(machine_mode, rtx_def*, bool)" is expected
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46333
--- Comment #7 from Jay 2010-11-07 00:28:39 UTC
---
rtl.c:
"../../gcc-4.5/gcc/rtl.def", line 82: Error: Badly formed constant expression.
"../../gcc-4.5/gcc/rtl.def", line 89: Error: "}" expected instead of "sizeof".
rtl.c, change:
#define DEF
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46333
--- Comment #6 from Jay 2010-11-07 00:15:05 UTC
---
trying..
#if defined(__cplusplus) && !defined(__GNUC__) && defined(__sun)
#undef HAVE_PUTC_UNLOCKED
#undef HAVE_PUTCHAR_UNLOCKED
#undef HAVE_GETC_UNLOCKED
#undef HAVE_GETCHAR_UNLOCKED
#endif
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46333
--- Comment #5 from Jay 2010-11-07 00:07:31 UTC
---
Huh, I misread and I don't see why _flsbuf/__flsbuf/_filbuf/__filbuf aren't
declared.
Anyway, I'll try:
# if defined(HAVE_PUTC_UNLOCKED) && (!defined(__cplusplus) || defined(__GNUC__)
|| !defin
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46333
--- Comment #4 from Jay 2010-11-06 23:53:47 UTC
---
"../../gcc-4.5/gcc/opts.c", line 1233: Error: The function "__flsbuf" must have
a prototype.
"../../gcc-4.5/gcc/opts.c", line 1350: Error: The function "__flsbuf" must have
a prototype.
#if (__
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46334
Summary: C++ compiler gets g++ switch even if it isn't g++
Product: gcc
Version: 4.5.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: other
AssignedTo:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46333
--- Comment #1 from Jay 2010-11-06 16:25:26 UTC
---
also a bunch of gcc options are being passed to CC, odd
I set CXX=/usr/bin/CC to get here.
CC: Warning: Option -Wno-long-long passed to ld, if ld is invoked, ignored
otherwise
source='../../gc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46333
Summary: problems with configure -enable-build-with-cxx
-disable-bootstrap
Product: gcc
Version: 4.5.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
C
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46091
Summary: missed optimization: x86 bt/btc/bts instructions
Product: gcc
Version: 4.3.5
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: target
AssignedTo:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45929
--- Comment #3 from Jay 2010-10-07 10:31:04 UTC
---
I'll switch to gcc 4.x. It would be nice to keep the files/functions smaller
for portability.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45929
Jay changed:
What|Removed |Added
Version|4.3.5 |4.5.1
--- Comment #1 from Jay 2010-10-07 09:03:21
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45929
Summary: insn-attrtab.c is too big, can't compile within a few
hundred MB (4.3.5 oops)
Product: gcc
Version: 4.3.5
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45928
Summary: genattrtab is too slow.
Product: gcc
Version: 4.5.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: spam
AssignedTo: unassig...@gcc.gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45927
Summary: autoconf regression wrt .quad availability targeting
amd64 from biarch cross compiler
Product: gcc
Version: 4.5.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pri
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45322
--- Comment #7 from Jay 2010-10-02 10:29:06 UTC
---
It looks like the machine I was using might not be available any longer. Sorry.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44984
--- Comment #3 from Jay 2010-10-02 10:27:53 UTC
---
> which compiler produces this
I'm afraid I'm not sure and can't quickly/easily make it happen again. Sorry.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45864
Summary: system.h is crufty maybe? Raise the level fo ANSI C89?
Product: gcc
Version: 4.5.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: other
Assigne
93 matches
Mail list logo
