--- Comment #3 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-21 07:33
---
Subject: Bug 24465
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-10-21 07:33:30
Modified files:
gcc: ChangeLog
gcc/config/rs6000: rs6000.c
--- Comment #4 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-21 07:37
---
Subject: Bug 24465
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: gcc-4_0-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-10-21 07:36:56
Modified files:
gcc: ChangeLog
--- Comment #5 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-21 07:48
---
Subject: Bug 24465
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: gcc-3_4-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-10-21 07:48:26
Modified files:
gcc: ChangeLog
--- Comment #6 from amodra at bigpond dot net dot au 2005-10-21 07:49
---
Fixed on all active branches
--
amodra at bigpond dot net dot au changed:
What|Removed |Added
Hi,
Before i try to reduce the module in which i'm seeing this, does the
backtrace sound familiar to someone?
TIA,
$ gfortran-4.1-HEAD -v -ffree-form -ffixed-line-length-none -W -Wall
-Wextra -pedantic -O0 -march=pentium4 -mtune=pentium4 -I./include -c
core_rel.f90
Using built-in specs.
Target:
A bunch of failed acats tests for gcc-4.0.2 using gnu as and gnu ld from
binutils-2.16.1, see:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2005-10/msg00531.html
acats.log shows for example:
splitting
/SCRATCH/gcc-build/IRIX64/mips-sgi-irix6.5/gcc-4.0.2/gcc-4.0.2/gcc/testsuite/ada/acats/tests/a/a83a02b.a
--- Comment #1 from r dot emrich at de dot tecosim dot com 2005-10-21
08:03 ---
(In reply to comment #0)
The relevant binutils PR 1150:
http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1150
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24468
> core_rel.f90:179: internal compiler error: in fold_convert, at
> fold-const.c:2028
This might be either PR19362 or PR20244 in bugzilla.
FX
--- Comment #1 from krebbel1 at de dot ibm dot com 2005-10-21 08:04 ---
This is fixed by:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-10/msg00803.html
Please review.
--
krebbel1 at de dot ibm dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #7 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-21 08:34
---
Subject: Bug 24450
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-10-21 08:34:07
Modified files:
libstdc++-v3 : ChangeLog
libstdc++-v3/config/locale
--
pcarlini at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.0.3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24450
In function deallocate(pointer _p, size_type __n) there is no synchronization
on __bin._M_used[__block->_M_thread_id] variable. During block deallocation
current thread decrements other threads _M_used variable without a lock.
This can result in undefined value of _M_used variable which than is us
--- Comment #1 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2005-10-21 09:02 ---
Yes, I think this is a real issue. We already discussed it briefly with Stefan
(the initial contributor of the mt_allocator code):
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/libstdc++/2004-07/msg00095.html
Thanks for reminding us the open p
The following program yields a segmentation fault in cc1plus when being
compiled with any optimization option -O.
If the argument in TestClass::f() is replaced either by a "const int" or an
"unsigned int", the program can indeed be compiled.
Moreover, if the ?-operator construct is replaced by, sa
--- Comment #1 from raasch at mathematik dot uni-marburg dot de 2005-10-21
10:10 ---
Created an attachment (id=10038)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=10038&action=view)
gzipped .ii file
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24470
--- Comment #4 from rmathew at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-21 10:23 ---
(In reply to comment #0)
> Eclipse's JDT/Core team was doing experiments with turning Eclipse's batch
> compiler into ECJ using GCJ. The goal was to provide an executable form of
> Eclipse's compiler. Unfortunately
--- Comment #5 from rmathew at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-21 10:26 ---
(In reply to comment #4)
>
> It would be nice if you could at least indicate what kind
> of non-compliance you are talking of here. Is it strictfp,
> accuracy of results, rounding of floating-point literals,
> or so
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-21 10:28 ---
With checking enabled and 3.4 branch HEAD we go loop infinitely allocating
_lots_ of ram.
Investigating.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-21 10:36 ---
Confirmed.
I'm seeing on x86_64:
FAIL: tmpdir-gcc.dg-struct-layout-1/t026 c_compat_x_tst.o-c_compat_y_tst.o
execute
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |A
--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-21 10:41 ---
We are endlessly folding
(gdb) call debug_tree(expr)
unit size
align 32 symtab 0 alias set -1 precision 32 min max >
arg 0
unit size
align 8 symtab 0 alias set -1 p
--
Summary: Invalid global deinitialization order
Product: gcc
Version: 4.0.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: other
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: wy
--- Comment #2 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-21 10:49
---
> Confirmed.
>
> I'm seeing on x86_64:
>
> FAIL: tmpdir-gcc.dg-struct-layout-1/t026 c_compat_x_tst.o-c_compat_y_tst.o
> execute
Thanks. The compat and struct-layout-1 testsuites are clean on sparc64 when
run
i
The extension "init_priority" doesn't work correctly on some platforms. Global
static objects are not deinitialized in a proper order, as the following
testcase shows. It is probably because of a linker bug.
8<--
#include
struct A {
--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-21 10:54 ---
The problem is the condition of the COND_EXPR is not folded:
arg 0
arg 0
readonly
arg 0 >
arg 1 >
so the transformation
/* If this is A
--- Comment #6 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-21 10:58 ---
gcj doesn't support strcitfp. The reserved word is allowed but ignored.
The main casualty of this is x86, where we fail some tests because of excess
precision.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24454
--- Comment #5 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-21 11:00 ---
I have a patch that papers over the problem.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24470
--- Comment #6 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-21 11:06
---
> I have a patch that papers over the problem.
The best ones. ;-)
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24470
--- Comment #11 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-21 11:07 ---
Honza, Richi... well? Is anyone going to do anything with this bug? :-)
--
steven at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #7 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-21 11:13 ---
I do not consider this to be a regression, really.
Store motion was always broken. There are reasons for why it is disabled
by default ;-)
pinskia, what do you think: Keep this marked as a regression, or not?
--
--- Comment #5 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-21 11:15 ---
Andreas, are you going to post your patch from comment #4?
--
steven at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #11 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-21 11:21 ---
How do you know this is hppa-linux only now? There's a bit if information
missing about how you got to that conclusion.
Is there some simple way to test this bug on HPPA? (Maybe add a HPPA
maintainer to the CC: li
--- Comment #70 from mueller at kde dot org 2005-10-21 11:36 ---
whats the status of the patch? can we at least have the visibility push/pop
patch for libstdc++ in gcc 4.0.x branch?
Marc: what is the reason this patch is rejected? sure its not a regression, but
visibility support is ent
--- Comment #71 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2005-10-21 11:40 ---
(In reply to comment #70)
> whats the status of the patch? can we at least have the visibility push/pop
> patch for libstdc++ in gcc 4.0.x branch?
See comment #63: at this stage changing libstdc++ is pointless.
--
ht
--- Comment #2 from erik dot edelmann at iki dot fi 2005-10-21 12:03
---
(In reply to comment #0)
> It reminds me a bit of bug 16606 but is different as the compiler crashes.
It's indeed basically the same problem as in PR 16606; we assign a default
initializer to variables of derived
--- Comment #7 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-21 12:11 ---
The problem is we didn't fold
arg 0
readonly
arg 0 >
which originates from build_binary_op() where default_conversion converts
unit size
align 32 symt
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-21 12:17 ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 24472 ***
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-21 12:17 ---
*** Bug 24471 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24472
--- Comment #12 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-21 12:19
---
My fix to fold works and is in out beta compiler.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24172
$ touch hello.c
$ gcc -c hello.c -lm -o hello.o
gcc: cannot specify -o with -c or -S with multiple files
--
Summary: [4.1 regression] Linker input files no longer ignored
with -c and -o
Product: gcc
Version: 4.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRM
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-21 12:26 ---
Confirmed.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|norma
--- Comment #7 from olivier_thomann at sympatico dot ca 2005-10-21 12:46
---
The problem seemed to be with precision in the floating point literal. When
converting a floating point literal to its double/float value, it ended up
having an unexpected value.
--
olivier_thomann at sympa
On Oct 21, 2005, at 7:13 AM, steven at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
pinskia, what do you think: Keep this marked as a regression, or not?
I think it should be kept as a regression. Otherwise it will get
overlooked before it is time to turn on store motion.
-- Pinski
--- Comment #8 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-21 12:48 ---
Subject: Re: [4.1 Regression] ICE: in extract_insn with -O -fgcse -fgcse-sm
On Oct 21, 2005, at 7:13 AM, steven at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> pinskia, what do you think: Keep this marked as a regression, or not
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-21 12:51 ---
This is obviously caused by my patch. I could swore I tested this case.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-21 12:52 ---
Guess I have to look into this.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||4.0.0 3.4.4 4.0.2
Known to work||3.4
--- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-21 13:01 ---
I used the wrong counter, I used the counter for all input files and not
language based input files.
I have a fix which I will be applying as obvious.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What
--- Comment #5 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-21 13:08
---
Subject: Bug 24473
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-10-21 13:08:50
Modified files:
gcc: ChangeLog gcc.c
Log message:
2005-10-
--- Comment #6 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-21 13:10 ---
Fixed, sorry for that problem.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #7 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-21 13:10
---
Subject: Bug 24473
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: gcc-4_0-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-10-21 13:10:17
Modified files:
gcc: ChangeLog gcc.c
--- Comment #7 from rpjday at mindspring dot com 2005-10-21 14:15 ---
In case anyone is interested, this error appeared between gcc-4.1 snapshots
20050917 and 20050924. gcc-4.1-20050917 built a toolchain without incident.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24445
--- Comment #3 from erik dot edelmann at iki dot fi 2005-10-21 14:57
---
Patch here: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2005-10/msg00481.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24426
--- Comment #5 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-21 14:57
---
Here's the nice version:
stage1/xgcc -Bstage1/ -B/opt/build/eric/local/gcc/sparc-sun-solaris2.10/bin/ -c
-g -O2 -fprofile-use -freorder-blocks-and-partition -DIN_GCC -W -Wall
-Wwrite-strings -Wstrict-prototype
--- Comment #8 from rmathew at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-21 15:14 ---
The bug about incorrect parsing and rounding of floating-point
literals is PR java/23432 and that about no support for strictfp
is PR java/10632. If this bug report is about either of these,
it can be closed as a dup
--- Comment #3 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-21 15:46
---
Subject: Bug 22383
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-10-21 15:46:19
Modified files:
gcc/ada: ChangeLog utils2.c gigi.h trans.c
Log message:
--- Comment #13 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-21 15:46
---
Subject: Bug 21937
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-10-21 15:46:19
Modified files:
gcc/ada: ChangeLog utils2.c gigi.h trans.c
Log message:
--- Comment #10 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-21 15:46
---
Subject: Bug 22328
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-10-21 15:46:19
Modified files:
gcc/ada: ChangeLog utils2.c gigi.h trans.c
Log message:
--- Comment #4 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-21 15:46
---
Subject: Bug 22381
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-10-21 15:46:19
Modified files:
gcc/ada: ChangeLog utils2.c gigi.h trans.c
Log message:
--- Comment #3 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-21 15:46
---
Subject: Bug 22420
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-10-21 15:46:19
Modified files:
gcc/ada: ChangeLog utils2.c gigi.h trans.c
Log message:
--- Comment #3 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-21 15:46
---
Subject: Bug 22419
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-10-21 15:46:19
Modified files:
gcc/ada: ChangeLog utils2.c gigi.h trans.c
Log message:
--- Comment #14 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-21 15:47
---
Subject: Bug 21937
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: gcc-4_0-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-10-21 15:47:47
Modified files:
gcc/ada: ChangeLog utils2.
--- Comment #4 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-21 15:48
---
Subject: Bug 22383
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: gcc-4_0-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-10-21 15:47:47
Modified files:
gcc/ada: ChangeLog utils2.c
--- Comment #5 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-21 15:48
---
Subject: Bug 22381
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: gcc-4_0-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-10-21 15:47:47
Modified files:
gcc/ada: ChangeLog utils2.c
--- Comment #4 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-21 15:48
---
Subject: Bug 22419
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: gcc-4_0-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-10-21 15:47:47
Modified files:
gcc/ada: ChangeLog utils2.c
--- Comment #11 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-21 15:48
---
Subject: Bug 22328
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: gcc-4_0-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-10-21 15:47:47
Modified files:
gcc/ada: ChangeLog utils2.
--- Comment #4 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-21 15:48
---
Subject: Bug 22420
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: gcc-4_0-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-10-21 15:47:47
Modified files:
gcc/ada: ChangeLog utils2.c
--- Comment #6 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-21 15:49
---
Subject: Bug 22418
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-10-21 15:49:13
Modified files:
gcc/ada: ChangeLog decl.c
Log message:
PR ada/22
--- Comment #7 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-21 15:50
---
Subject: Bug 22418
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: gcc-4_0-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-10-21 15:49:58
Modified files:
gcc/ada: ChangeLog decl.c
--- Comment #15 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-21 15:54
---
See http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-10/msg01309.html
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #12 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-21 15:54
---
See http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-10/msg01309.html
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #6 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-21 15:55
---
See http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-10/msg01309.html
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-21 15:56
---
See http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-10/msg01309.html
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-21 15:56
---
See http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-10/msg01309.html
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #8 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-21 15:57
---
See http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-10/msg01310.html
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #8 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-21 16:01
---
Subject: Bug 24260
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: gcc-4_0-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]2005-10-21 16:01:26
Modified files:
gcc/cp : parser.c
Added f
--- Comment #5 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-21 15:55
---
See http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-10/msg01309.html
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #9 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-21 16:03
---
Subject: Bug 24260
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: gcc-4_0-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]2005-10-21 16:03:10
Modified files:
gcc/cp : ChangeLog
--- Comment #10 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-21 16:03
---
Subject: Bug 24260
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]2005-10-21 16:03:49
Modified files:
gcc/cp : parser.c ChangeLog
gcc/testsuite : Ch
--- Comment #11 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-21 16:04
---
Fixed in 4.0.3.
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Sta
--- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-21 16:10 ---
Patch submitted:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-10/msg01313.html
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #10 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-21 16:10
---
Andrew, why do you say that the location of the diagnostics in comment #5?
I get:
/home/mitchell/tmp/pr20164.cpp: In function 'void Bar2()':
/home/mitchell/tmp/pr20164.cpp:19: error: no matching function for cal
--- Comment #12 from thebohemian at gmx dot net 2005-10-21 16:13 ---
Tromey suggested to not transform all Utf8Const object into a canonical form so
I fixed the invokevirtual problem in the first way.
I introduced a new method _Jv_equalUt8Const_classnames method which reliably
compares
--- Comment #11 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-21 16:15
---
(In reply to comment #10)
> Andrew, why do you say that the location of the diagnostics in comment #5?
Those line numbers are different than what I orginally got. So something fixed
this already in 4.0.2 and 4.1.0
--- Comment #13 from thebohemian at gmx dot net 2005-10-21 16:15 ---
Created an attachment (id=10041)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=10041&action=view)
proposed fix
This fixes this bug and bunch of related problems.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?i
--- Comment #6 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-21 17:24 ---
I tried the patch with today's sources on powerpc64-linux and got the
following errors:
/home/janis/tools/gcc-mline-20051021/bin/gcc -c -o prune.o-fprofile-use
-DSPEC_CPU2000 -m32 -O3 prune.c
pr
--- Comment #14 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-21 17:54
---
Subject: Bug 15220
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-10-21 17:54:20
Modified files:
libcpp : ChangeLog files.c init.c internal.h
Log mes
--- Comment #15 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-21 17:56
---
Subject: Bug 15220
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: gcc-4_0-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-10-21 17:56:51
Modified files:
libcpp : ChangeLog file
--- Comment #16 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-21 18:04
---
Subject: Bug 15220
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-10-21 18:04:22
Modified files:
gcc/testsuite : ChangeLog
Added files:
gcc/testsuite
--- Comment #5 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-21 18:43
---
Works on mainline, the front-end doesn't generate the same expanded code:
--- gcc-4_0-branch/sparc-sun-solaris2.8/pr23995.ads.dg 2005-10-21
20:39:56.006059768 +0200
+++ gcc/sparc-sun-solaris2.8/pr23995.ads.dg
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||4.0.3 4.1.0
Summary|[3.4/4.0/4.1 regression]|[3.4 regr
--- Comment #6 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-21 18:57
---
Subject: Bug 24455
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: gomp-20050608-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]2005-10-21 18:57:39
Modified files:
gcc: ChangeLog.g
--- Comment #7 from dnovillo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-21 18:59
---
Fixed. http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-10/msg01311.html
--
dnovillo at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #9 from olivier_thomann at sympatico dot ca 2005-10-21 19:04
---
Looking at the two other bug reports, it looks like this might be a duplicate
of PR java/10632. So feel free to close is as a dup.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24454
--- Comment #6 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-21 19:34
---
Investigating.
--
ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assigne
--- Comment #5 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-21 19:40
---
Subject: Bug 24383
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-10-21 19:40:32
Modified files:
libgfortran: ChangeLog
libgfortran/io : unix.c
Log
FAIL: gcc.dg/tls/pr24428-2.c execution test
FAIL: gcc.dg/tls/pr24428.c execution test
have appeared on i686-pc-linux-gnu when those tests were added
(20051018-20051020), on both mainline and 4.0 branch.
I also see such failures on IA64, for which I'll open a separate bug report.
--
FAIL: gcc.dg/tls/pr24428-2.c execution test
FAIL: gcc.dg/tls/pr24428.c execution test
have appeared on ia64-hp-hpux11.23 when those tests were added
(20051018-20051020), on both mainline and 4.0 branch.
These failures only appear with -milp32 not -mlp64, *except* that on mainline
only
FAIL: gcc.d
--- Comment #6 from fxcoudert at gmail dot com 2005-10-21 19:49 ---
Fixed.
--
fxcoudert at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
--- Comment #7 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-21 19:49 ---
I took a closer look and discovered that compilation of prune.c also exhausts
memory without the patch, so the patch allows a latent problem to show itself.
With the patch, files fast-match.c, build-disjuncts.c, and po
FAIL: g++.old-deja/g++.abi/vtable2.C (test for excess errors)
has appeared on mainline on hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.11 on 20051021.
/scratch/gcc/nightly-2005-10-21-mainline/src/gcc-mainline/gcc/testsuite/g++.old-deja/g++.abi/vtable2.C:127:
error: alias definitions not supported in this configuration
1 - 100 of 138 matches
Mail list logo
