--
Bug 19292 depends on bug 20224, which changed state.
Bug 20224 Summary: gfortran - flags error on strange, but correct f66 program
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20224
What|Old Value |New Value
---
--- Additional Comments From tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-03
07:04 ---
Resolving as WONTFIX, as agreed. There realy isn't a good reason
to support this.
Thomas
--
What|Removed |Added
--
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |bonzini at gcc dot gnu dot
|dot org |org
Status|UNCONFIRMED
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-03
08:09 ---
Subject: Bug 21282
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-05-03 08:08:46
Modified files:
gcc: ChangeLog convert.c
gcc/test
--- Additional Comments From bonzini at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-03
08:14 ---
The reason is that ia64 does not have any option to enable special SIMD
instructions, so it can vectorize these tests using hardware 64-bit vectors.
The two tests should be skipped on ia64, and actually eve
--- Additional Comments From tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-03
08:23 ---
Patch here:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2005-04/msg00716.html
--
What|Removed |Added
--
Bug 21054 depends on bug 20947, which changed state.
Bug 20947 Summary: [4.1 Regression] ICE in check_loop_closed_ssa_use, at
tree-ssa-loop-manip.c:394 with -ftree-vectorize
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20947
What|Old Value |New Value
---
--- Additional Comments From micis at gmx dot de 2005-05-03 08:24 ---
Now it works for me too.
Michael Cieslinski
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
20549
* the exact version of GCC
gcc version 3.4.4 20050503 (prerelease)
* the system type
i686-pc-linux-gnu (rhel3)
* the options given when GCC was configured/built
../gcc/configure --prefix=/opt/gcc34-20050503 --enable-languages=c,c++
* the complete command line that triggers the bug;
/opt
--- Additional Comments From weary at gamebox dot net 2005-05-03 08:31
---
also in 4.0.0
--
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||4.0.0
K
--- Additional Comments From jkanze at cheuvreux dot com 2005-05-03 08:34
---
Subject: Re: Lack of Posix compliant thread safety in std::basic_string
|> Isn't this a bug as opposed to "enhancement"? Enhancement
|> suggests that the behaviour is basically correct, but could be
|> impr
--- Additional Comments From jkanze at cheuvreux dot com 2005-05-03 08:37
---
Subject: Re: Lack of Posix compliant thread safety in std::basic_string
|> Does the C++ standard mention multithreading and Posix
|> threads? ;)
No, but the g++ installation procedures do. According to the
--- Additional Comments From boris at kolpackov dot net 2005-05-03 08:43
---
Not that I think you will change your mind, just for the record...
'S' was explicitly disambiguated in 'M' with 'typedef S1 S'. For that reason
reference to 'S' within 'M' is not ambiguous. It seems logical th
works as expected on : gcc 2.95, freebsd/linux
does not work as expected on: gcc 3.4.2, freebsd/linux
//non-const references to temp values should be disallowed
--
//the code
enum X{ a, b, c };
class C
{
public:
void func( X & ref = a ) //illegal - should not compile.
{ }
--- Additional Comments From jkanze at cheuvreux dot com 2005-05-03 08:56
---
Subject: Re: Lack of Posix compliant thread safety in std::basic_string
|> >I am sending this to the g++ bug list on the recommendation of
|> >Gabriel Dos Reis. From what little I've read in the g++
|> >doc
There are numerous places in the library where rank 7
arrays are not handled correctly. This affects, for example,
in_pack:
$ cat re.f90
program main
real, dimension (2,2,2,2,2,2,2):: a
a = 1.0
call foo(a(2:1:-1,:,:,:,:,:,:))
end program main
subroutine foo(a)
real, dimension (2,2,2,2,2,
seen with CVS 20050502, last version that built sucessfully was CVS 20050413.
reproducible on i486-linux and x86_64-linux.
Bootstrap comparison failure!
ada/b_gnatb.o differs
make[3]: *** [gnucompare-lean] Error 1
--
Summary: [3.4 regression] ada bootstrap comparision failure
--- Additional Comments From jkanze at cheuvreux dot com 2005-05-03 09:09
---
Subject: Re: Lack of Posix compliant thread safety in std::basic_string
|> Whereas I'm all for providing alternate memory management
|> policies (we are very close to that in the v7-branch and I
|> promise f
--- Additional Comments From pcarlini at suse dot de 2005-05-03 09:29
---
> I'm not sure what sort of help you are looking for. I thought
> that I very clearly pointed out the problem, and the point in
> the code where it occured.
Ok, my message was not clear. I'm looking for help abou
--- Additional Comments From ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-03
09:48 ---
> I'm not sure what is best done with the signbit definition (maybe nothing if
> it will never call a library function at present, even though it isn't
> properly type-generic);
We can discriminate using
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-03
09:50 ---
Subject: Bug 21131
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: gcc-3_3-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-05-03 09:49:47
Modified files:
libstdc++-v3 : Change
--- Additional Comments From gdr at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-03 10:01
---
Applied 3.3.x patch too.
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|3.4.4 |
--- Additional Comments From pcarlini at suse dot de 2005-05-03 10:15
---
... remember to regenerate ;)
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21131
--- Additional Comments From pcarlini at suse dot de 2005-05-03 10:39
---
In exceptions, I'm tempted to use something very simple, a fixed-size buffer,
as in STLPort, but that is the typical change affecting the ABI :(
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21334
--- Additional Comments From joseph at codesourcery dot com 2005-05-03
10:54 ---
Subject: Re: Problem with define of HUGE_VAL in math_c99.
On Tue, 3 May 2005, ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> This works fine for "big" numbers, but are there similar tricks to distinguish
> den
--- Additional Comments From jkanze at cheuvreux dot com 2005-05-03 10:59
---
Subject: Re: Lack of Posix compliant thread safety in std::basic_string
|> > I'm not sure what sort of help you are looking for. I thought
|> > that I very clearly pointed out the problem, and the point in
--- Additional Comments From pcarlini at suse dot de 2005-05-03 11:14
---
Hi James, and thanks for your explanations. Indeed, maybe better concentrating
on the v7-branch + documentation updates: as I told you already the framework
is already there and I will add very soon a different pol
--- Additional Comments From ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-03
11:35 ---
> Use __FLT_MIN__ etc. since may not be included.
Of course.
> For a good fix we'll want to add built-in functions compatible with the
> Solaris header and remove the relevant fixes, and those would te
I have internal compiler error for the following c code:
int a;
void* p;
void foo (void)
{
switch (a)
{
a0: case 0: p = &&a1;
a1: case 1: p = &&a2;
a2: default: p = &&a1;
}
goto *p;
}
Command line:
gcc -c -O2 1.c
Output:
1.c: In function 'foo':
1.c:5: error: dominator of
--- Additional Comments From pcarlini at suse dot de 2005-05-03 12:03
---
Fixed for 4.0.1.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-03
12:12 ---
Subject: Bug 21209
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: gcc-4_0-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-05-03 12:02:14
Modified files:
libstdc++-v3 : Change
--- Additional Comments From debian-gcc at lists dot debian dot org
2005-05-03 12:30 ---
on powerpc-linux, the build fails earlier:
stage2/xgcc -Bstage2/ -B/usr/powerpc-linux/bin/ -c -O2 -DIN_GCC -W -Wall
-Wwrite-strings -Wstrict-prototypes -Wmissing-prototypes -Wno-error
-DH
--- Additional Comments From joseph at codesourcery dot com 2005-05-03
12:59 ---
Subject: Re: Problem with define of HUGE_VAL in math_c99.
On Tue, 3 May 2005, ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> > We have a functional __builtin_isnan, there is no need to fix that
> > particular
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-03
13:01 ---
Subject: Bug 21297
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-05-03 12:58:13
Modified files:
gcc: ChangeLog
gcc/config/i386: i
Output of gcc -v:
Using built-in specs.
Target: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
Configured with: ../gcc-4.0.0/configure --prefix=/home/williamg/local/x86_64-40
--enable-__cxa_atexit --enable-languages=c,c++
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.0.0
Command line:
~/local/x86_64-40/bin/gcc -O1 -Wall
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-03
13:10 ---
Subject: Bug 21330
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-05-03 13:09:54
Modified files:
gcc: ChangeLog loop-unswitch.c
gc
Output of gcc -v:
Using built-in specs.
Target: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
Configured with: ../gcc-4.0.0/configure --prefix=/home/williamg/local/x86_64-40
--enable-__cxa_atexit --enable-languages=c,c++
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.0.0
Command line:
~/local/x86_64-40/bin/gcc -O1 -Wall
--- Additional Comments From aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-03 13:12
---
This bug is obsoleted by the fix for PR java/19285.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|N
--
Bug 17574 depends on bug 18399, which changed state.
Bug 18399 Summary: [4.0/4.1 Regression] Class initialization optimization does
not work with the inliner
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18399
What|Old Value |New Value
---
--- Additional Comments From william at gallaf dot net 2005-05-03 13:32
---
Browser hung for 5 minutes after first submit without showing a "bug submitted"
page, so I tried again ... apologies for noise.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 21357 ***
--
What
--- Additional Comments From william at gallaf dot net 2005-05-03 13:32
---
*** Bug 21358 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21357
--- Additional Comments From aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-03 13:34
---
I'm tempted to change this to WONTFIX.
The patch for PR java/19285 party fixes this for indirect dispatch: in A.foo2(),
the field B.bar is initialized by a call to _Jv_ResolvePoolEntry, and this is
only called
--
What|Removed |Added
CC||ivan at yosifov dot net
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21314
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-03
13:43 ---
This is known and a long standing bug.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21357
--- Additional Comments From kho at redhat dot com 2005-05-03 14:25 ---
Fixed in cvs.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
--- Additional Comments From ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-03
14:39 ---
> __builtin_isnan is type-generic and functionally so, unlike
> __builtin_signbit which isn't although it should be and __builtin_isinf
> which tries to be type-generic and is broken in doing so (bug 205
--- Additional Comments From jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-03 14:42
---
Yeah, a bug in combine_simplify_rtx. I have a patch that fixes this, but
while working on a testcase I encountered other bug as well, so am looking
into that too.
--
What|Removed
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-03
14:45 ---
Are you building from the source tarball or from CVS?
If from the source tarball, you don't need bison which is why it is just a
warning.
Otherwise this is a bug in the release process if bison is now requi
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-03
14:51 ---
Fixed.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
--
Summary: gfortran internal error
Product: gcc
Version: 4.0.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: critical
Priority: P2
Component: fortran
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: matt at mail
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-03
15:00 ---
Confirmed, reduced testcase:
struct coperator_stack
{
template
void push3();
};
template
void bla(F f);
template
void f()
{
bla(coperator_stack::push3);
}
Related to PR 20549.
--
What
--
What|Removed |Added
Severity|critical|normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21359
--- Additional Comments From matt at mail dot bettencourt dot info
2005-05-03 15:03 ---
Created an attachment (id=8805)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8805&action=view)
code which causes compiler error
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21359
--- Additional Comments From matt at mail dot bettencourt dot info
2005-05-03 15:04 ---
mail.bettencourt.info> gfortran -c part.f90
part.f90: In function 'updateposition':
part.f90:168: internal compiler error: in gfc_conv_ss_descriptor, at
fortran/trans-array.c:1264
Please submit a full
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-03
15:04 ---
The problem is that we are checking too late.
Confirmed, a regression from 3.3.3.
--
What|Removed |Added
Following code produces wrong results:
#include
float f = -1.0f ;
int main( void )
{
if ( (unsigned int)f != (unsigned int)-1.0f ) {
printf( "%-12s %04d:NG...[%u]--->[%u]\n",
__FILE__, __LINE__, (unsigned int)-1.0f, (unsigned
int)f ) ;
}
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-03
15:06 ---
(In reply to comment #24)
> "This message, including any attachments may contain confidential and
> privileged material; it is intended only for the person to whom it is
...
Can you stop attaching this mess
--
What|Removed |Added
Component|c |middle-end
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21360
--- Additional Comments From dtemirbulatov at ru dot mvista dot com
2005-05-03 15:09 ---
Created an attachment (id=8806)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8806&action=view)
testcase
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21360
The following code produces different output in gcc4.0.0 and MSVC++7 .NET.
Additionally, I've tried 3.4.3 20050227 (Red Hat 3.4.3-22.fc3) and gcc 3.3.4
20040817 (Red Hat Linux 3.3.4-2), who all produce the same output as gcc4.0.0.
I'm unsure who is right here (don't know the exact C++ standards).
--
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |aph at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org |
Status|NEW
--- Additional Comments From dtemirbulatov at ru dot mvista dot com
2005-05-03 15:11 ---
Created an attachment (id=8807)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8807&action=view)
proposed patch
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21360
--
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||3.4.0 4.0.0 4.1.0
Known to work||3.3.5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-03
15:17 ---
Confirmed, reduced testcaseL
program bug
real :: t_intersect(2)
t_intersect(minloc(t_intersect)) = 1.e10
end program
Related to PR 21063.
--
What|Removed |Adde
--- Additional Comments From bh at techhouse dot brown dot edu 2005-05-03
15:18 ---
My (apparently broken) gmp is:
> rpm -qf /usr/lib/libgmp.so.3.3.2
gmp-4.1.2-2
Downloading a new GMP (4.1.4, which creates libgmp.so.3.3.3) appears to work. I
wonder if it's easy to check for this situa
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-03
15:21 ---
Confirmed.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
E
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-03
15:21 ---
Closing as works for me, a GMP bug.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED
"pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| Are you building from the source tarball or from CVS?
| If from the source tarball, you don't need bison which is why it is just a
warning.
| Otherwise this is a bug in the release process if bison is now required (and
a regression).
--- Additional Comments From gdr at integrable-solutions dot net
2005-05-03 15:24 ---
Subject: Re: configure reports only a warning when bison is not installed
"pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| Are you building from the source tarball or from CVS?
| If fro
Compiling the attached jarfile with optimisation fails with gcj (GCC) 4.0.0
20050423 (Red Hat 4.0.0-2).
$ gcj -findirect-dispatch -shared bork.jar # works
$ gcj -findirect-dispatch -shared -O bork.jar
org/apache/catalina/session/FileStore.java: In class
'org.apache.catalina.session.FileStore':
org
--- Additional Comments From gbenson at redhat dot com 2005-05-03 15:26
---
Created an attachment (id=8808)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8808&action=view)
Testcase
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21362
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-03
15:26 ---
Ok, we don't require bison at least before, sounds like the release package is
messed up.
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From gbenson at redhat dot com 2005-05-03 15:27
---
This is possibly the same as bug 20606.
--
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|
--- Additional Comments From gdr at integrable-solutions dot net
2005-05-03 15:43 ---
Subject: Re: [4.0/4.1 Regression] build now requires bision
"pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
|What|Removed |Added
| ---
--- Additional Comments From gbenson at redhat dot com 2005-05-03 15:53
---
Created an attachment (id=8809)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8809&action=view)
Testcase source
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21362
--- Additional Comments From jkanze at cheuvreux dot com 2005-05-03 15:57
---
Subject: Re: Lack of Posix compliant thread safety in std::basic_string
|> > "This message, including any attachments may contain confidential and
|> > privileged material; it is intended only for the person
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-03
16:00 ---
Confirmed, a regression from 4.0.0.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED
"jkanze at cheuvreux dot com" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Regretfully no. For reasons beyond my fathoming, we have to use
> Lotus Notes on a Windows machine for all external email, and
> they've set up the Notes server to add this trailer (which as
> you correctly point out, doesn't make much s
--
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |aph at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org |
Status|UNCONFIRMED
--- Additional Comments From aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-03 16:10
---
See also PR 21362
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20606
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-03
16:15 ---
We no longer fail with this code on the mainline but most likely because
actually thread the jump which
I was taking in comment #5.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20606
--- Additional Comments From joseph at codesourcery dot com 2005-05-03
16:21 ---
Subject: Re: Problem with define of HUGE_VAL in math_c99.
On Tue, 3 May 2005, ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> 1. Can we work around bug 20558 by using the sizeof trick for isinf?
No, because
--
What|Removed |Added
GCC host triplet|gcc version 3.4.4 20050429 |
|(prerelease) [FreeBSD] |
GCC target triplet||i686-pc-linu
The following code generate a compilation error:
class Foo {
private:
Foo() { }
};
class Bar : public Foo
{
public:
Bar() {}
};
int main()
{
return 0;
}
however,commenting out "Bar(){}" (i.e. let the compiler generate one for me),do
not cause any compilation error.
the same case for
--- Additional Comments From jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-03 16:33
---
Conversion of out-of-range floating point values to integers yields undefined
behavior in both C and C++. There is no need for it to be consistent between
compile-time and runtime conversions.
However, the I
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-03
16:36 ---
(In reply to comment #8)
> We no longer fail with this code on the mainline but most likely because
> actually thread the jump
> which I was taking in comment #5.
Let me rewrite that.
This now works on th
--- Additional Comments From andreast at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-03
16:47 ---
Index: configure.in
===
RCS file: /cvs/gcc/gcc/configure.in,v
retrieving revision 1.341.2.2
diff -u -r1.341.2.2 configure.in
--- configure.in
--
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|aoliva at gcc dot gnu dot |unassigned at gcc dot gnu
|org |dot org
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-03
17:00 ---
Subject: Bug 16888
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: gcc-4_0-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-05-03 17:00:26
Modified files:
gcc: Change
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-03
17:01 ---
Subject: Bug 16888
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-05-03 17:01:01
Modified files:
gcc: ChangeLog
gcc/config/i386: i
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-03
17:06 ---
I think this is how C++ works. Or this because of the lazy createness of
constructors.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21363
> [de.po]
> #: tree-ssa.c:1379
> msgid "%H%qD is used uninitialized in this function"
> msgstr "%J%qD wird in dieser Funktion uninitialisiert verwendet"
The %J causes gcc to segfault. Changing it to %H fixes everything, obviously.
Besides, the `q' modifier in %qD doesn't seem to be honoured in th
--- Additional Comments From tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-03
18:23 ---
Could you run gij under gdb and attach a stack trace to this PR?
That might help.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21285
--- Additional Comments From jsm28 at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-03 18:24
---
The specific translation issue you mention will need to be dealt with by the
translators. I don't know why you say %q isn't honoured, the translation
includes translations for the opening and closing quotes a
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-03
18:24 ---
(In reply to comment #7)
> John, does this work now?
Ping,
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20930
--- Additional Comments From tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-03
18:29 ---
I didn't download the source to try this out.
But based on the stack trace, I think the problem is probably that
a class compiled with the C++ ABI is referring to an org.xml class.
This doesn't work, as these
This is BASH 2.05b - DISPLAY on
Tue May 3 11:29:07 PST 2005
bash-2.05b$ cd f:/temp/obj1/
bash-2.05b$ ls
Makefile config.cache config.status* gcc/ libcpp/
multilib.out sh3-elf/
build-i686-pc-cygwin/ config.logfixincludes/intl/ libiberty/
serdep.tmp
bash-2.05b$ ma
When compiling a module with -bundle the -bundle does not get passed right.
It results in an unknown option "undle".
--
Summary: The -bundle linking option does not get processed right
on darwin
Product: gcc
Version: 4.1.0
Status: U
--- Additional Comments From christophe at saout dot de 2005-05-03 18:46
---
Ok, forget that last part, I'm an idiot. (I added lots of debug to trace down
the problem, in the actual warning, the quotes appear correctly)
Only the %J -> %H problem then.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
--- Additional Comments From rittle at latour dot waar dot labs dot mot dot
com 2005-05-03 19:08 ---
Subject: Re: Lack of Posix compliant thread safety in
std::basic_string
>|> Secondly, it is clear that your bug report is hypothetical. The
>|> library maintainers do not typic
1 - 100 of 213 matches
Mail list logo
