https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83077
--- Comment #20 from François Dumont ---
I run make check-c++ before and after my patch and I see no regression. I even
have less failures with the patch even if I haven't check yet why.
So I think the patch is quite safe, just waiting for valid
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83077
--- Comment #19 from Iain Sandoe ---
(In reply to François Dumont from comment #17)
> (In reply to Iain Sandoe from comment #15)
Your proposed patch for the friend issue does fix the libstdc++ cases for my
Darwin patchset.
> > many of the c++ f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83077
--- Comment #18 from Iain Sandoe ---
for changes to libstdc++ or the FE I usually run "make check-c++" which does
the library (plus the libgomp and itm deps) and the FE.
My guess is that the FE is referencing something that needs to have an inli
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83077
--- Comment #17 from François Dumont ---
(In reply to Iain Sandoe from comment #15)
>
> many of the c++ fails are of this form:
>
> contracts-tmpl-spec1.C:(.text+0x6f): undefined reference to
> `handle_contract_violation(std::experimental::cont
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83077
--- Comment #16 from Iain Sandoe ---
(In reply to François Dumont from comment #14)
> Good news then.
>
> On my side I only had some failures due to a faulty friend declaration in
> gnu-versioned-namespace mode in for which I've submitted a pat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83077
--- Comment #15 from Iain Sandoe ---
(In reply to Iain Sandoe from comment #13)
> (In reply to Iain Sandoe from comment #12)
> > (In reply to Iain Sandoe from comment #11)
> > > (In reply to François Dumont from comment #10)
> > > > This is becau
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83077
--- Comment #14 from François Dumont ---
Good news then.
On my side I only had some failures due to a faulty friend declaration in
gnu-versioned-namespace mode in for which I've submitted a patch:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/libstdc++/2023-Au
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83077
--- Comment #13 from Iain Sandoe ---
(In reply to Iain Sandoe from comment #12)
> (In reply to Iain Sandoe from comment #11)
> > (In reply to François Dumont from comment #10)
> > > This is because you are facing the PR65762 issue. I just attache
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83077
--- Comment #12 from Iain Sandoe ---
(In reply to Iain Sandoe from comment #11)
> (In reply to François Dumont from comment #10)
> > This is because you are facing the PR65762 issue. I just attached a path
> > proposal to it that you need to appl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83077
--- Comment #11 from Iain Sandoe ---
(In reply to François Dumont from comment #10)
> This is because you are facing the PR65762 issue. I just attached a path
> proposal to it that you need to apply too to be able to run your test.
> You'll be ev
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83077
--- Comment #10 from François Dumont ---
This is because you are facing the PR65762 issue. I just attached a path
proposal to it that you need to apply too to be able to run your test. You'll
be even able to simply use --disable-libstdcxx-dual-ab
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83077
--- Comment #9 from Iain Sandoe ---
(In reply to Iain Sandoe from comment #8)
> (In reply to François Dumont from comment #7)
> > Sure, if you follow the email thread you'll see my latest patch:
> >
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83077
--- Comment #8 from Iain Sandoe ---
(In reply to François Dumont from comment #7)
> Sure, if you follow the email thread you'll see my latest patch:
>
> https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2023-August/628399.html
Well, I thought I have th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83077
--- Comment #7 from François Dumont ---
Sure, if you follow the email thread you'll see my latest patch:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2023-August/628399.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83077
--- Comment #6 from Iain Sandoe ---
is there a version available for testing, rebased to trunk (the one I saw from
Aug 19th pretty much fails to apply for most entries)?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83077
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
Last reconfirmed|2017-11-20 00
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83077
François Dumont changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |fdumont at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83077
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|11.0|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83077
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|9.4 |11.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83077
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|9.3 |9.4
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83077
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|9.2 |9.3
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83077
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|9.0 |9.2
--- Comment #2 from Jakub Jelinek -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83077
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|8.0 |9.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83077
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
24 matches
Mail list logo
