--- Comment #2 from jv244 at cam dot ac dot uk 2009-08-31 07:37 ---
Compile time is about 4s with the 4.4 branch, so I'll mark it as a regression.
--
jv244 at cam dot ac dot uk changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #2 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-08-31 08:05 ---
That's correct. In C++ gnu_inline attribute always means the GNU C extern
inline function, i.e. it is inlined if deemed desirable and otherwise you must
provide an external definition of the function.
If you don't do
--- Comment #2 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-08-31 08:10 ---
Why is this considered a regression?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41156
--- Comment #18 from rainer at emrich-ebersheim dot de 2009-08-31 08:11
---
Subject: Re: assembler isn't called
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
ktietz at gcc dot gnu dot org schrieb:
> --- Comment #17 from ktietz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-08-30 08:35
> ---
>
--- Comment #3 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-08-31 09:03 ---
I'm back from vacation and aware of this problem. I will look at it once I am
through all the mail and similar stuff (provided I don't find anything more
urgent) which will take a while.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/b
--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-08-31 10:12 ---
On the 4.4 branch with -fgraphite? Or are you complaining about the 4s vs. 8s
without -fgraphite? In which case the bug summary is misleading (also you
didn't build trunk with --enable-checking=release, so that num
--- Comment #5 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-08-31 10:22 ---
Subject: Bug 40996
Author: janus
Date: Mon Aug 31 10:22:32 2009
New Revision: 151240
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=151240
Log:
2009-08-31 Janus Weil
PR fortran/40996
* chec
--- Comment #6 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-08-31 10:36 ---
r151240 implements basic allocatable scalars. Allocatable scalar components are
still missing.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40996
--- Comment #4 from jv244 at cam dot ac dot uk 2009-08-31 10:50 ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> On the 4.4 branch with -fgraphite?
yes, that is correct, i.e. with the 4.4 branch the
gfortran -fgraphite -c -O2 -ffast-math -funroll-loops -ftree-vectorize
-march=native -ftime-report tmp
--- Comment #4 from t7 at gmail dot com 2009-08-31 11:08 ---
g++ --save-temps -c -omain.o -O -I. -Igenerators -Igenerators/unix
-Igenerators/win32 -Igenerators/mac
-IE:\msys\1.0\qt-all-opensource-src-4.5.2/include
-IE:\msys\1.0\qt-all-opensource-src-4.5.2/include/QtCore
-IE:\msys\1.0
--- Comment #5 from t7 at gmail dot com 2009-08-31 11:15 ---
Created an attachment (id=18454)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18454&action=view)
Preprocessed test case.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41153
--- Comment #6 from t7 at gmail dot com 2009-08-31 11:16 ---
Created an attachment (id=18455)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18455&action=view)
saves
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41153
--- Comment #7 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-08-31 12:06 ---
Reducing (seems to work with 4.5).
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
When using vshll_n_u8 intrinsic, gcc 4.4.1 incorrectly rejects shift operand
having value >= 8, claiming that it is out of range.
When using the following test code
/*/
#include
uint16x8_t test_vshll_n_u8 (uint8x8_t a)
{
return vshll_n_u8(a, 8);
}
/*/
Test with gcc
--- Comment #8 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-08-31 12:45 ---
Confirmed.
class QString { };
QString fixString(QString string);
static QString fixPathToLocalOS(const QString &in)
{
return fixString(in);
}
void __attribute__((__optimize__ ("0")))
--- Comment #24 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2009-08-31 13:06 ---
(In reply to comment #23)
> Aren't these compile lines identical?
Apparently no, -funsafe-math-optimizations turns on optimization(s) that cannot
be undone by
-fno-signed-zeros -fno-trapping-math -fno-associative-ma
--- Comment #3 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-08-31 13:51 ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> Why is this considered a regression?
>
It is a regression for PR 32893, which was fixed by disabling
vectorizer on local variables requiring > 4byte alignment since
we couldn't realign th
Reported by Jorge at http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2009-08/msg00474.html
integer, dimension (4) :: ier = 0
integer, dimension (:), allocatable :: a
allocate (a (16), stat = ier)
end
Gives a segfault with GCC 4.1 to 4.5. With the current trunk, valgrind shows:
==26026== Invalid read of size 4
==2
The following program produces a warning message in gfortran 4.3 and 4.4, but
not 4.5. I believe it produced a warning message in early versions of 4.5.
PROGRAM test
IF(.TRUE.) THEN
GOTO 50
50 ENDIF
END PROGRAM test
--
Summary: gfortran 4.5 does not produce "Warning: Deleted featur
--- Comment #9 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-08-31 14:32 ---
The problem is that the optimization saving/restoring infrastructure seems to
ignore OVERRIDE_OPTIONS. i386 OPTIMIZATION_OPTIONS sets flag_pcc_struct_return
to 2 and expects OVERRIDE_OPTIONS to set it to 0 resp. 1 if
Without LTO support the testcase fails like
FAIL: gcc.dg/20081223-1.c (test for errors, line 5)
FAIL: gcc.dg/20081223-1.c (test for excess errors)
--
Summary: gcc.dg/20081223-1.c should be in gcc.dg/lto/
Product: gcc
Version: lto
Status: UNCONFIRMED
--- Comment #25 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2009-08-31 15:04 ---
If I compare the results of -fdump-tree-original for the first 2 cases of
comment #21 I get:
[ibook-dhum] test/dbg_air% gfc -m64 -O2 -funsafe-math-optimizations
-fdump-tree-original air_db.f90
[ibook-dhum] test/dbg_
--- Comment #26 from jv244 at cam dot ac dot uk 2009-08-31 15:20 ---
(In reply to comment #25)
> - if (npx[(integer(kind=8)) i + -1] + 1 >
> j)
> + if (NON_LVALUE_EXPR
> >= j)> where NON_LVALUE_EXPR appear when th
--- Comment #27 from rguenther at suse dot de 2009-08-31 15:23 ---
Subject: Re: Time increase for the Polyhedron test
air.f90 due to bad optimization
On Mon, 31 Aug 2009, jv244 at cam dot ac dot uk wrote:
> --- Comment #26 from jv244 at cam dot ac dot uk 2009-08-31 15:20 ---
--- Comment #1 from kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-08-31 15:43 ---
(In reply to comment #0)
> The following program produces a warning message in gfortran 4.3 and 4.4, but
> not 4.5. I believe it produced a warning message in early versions of 4.5.
>
> PROGRAM test
> IF(.TRUE.) THEN
--- Comment #2 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-08-31 16:33 ---
Yeah, I'm afraid we can't parse definitely when we see : after enum identifier,
if : isn't followed by type-specifier-seq, we should return NULL.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41127
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41100
The following sample is an invalid Fortran code although the compiler gives an
ICE error message.
Perhaps, the compiler error message in this case could be improved, e.g. tell
what we are doing wrong.
Regards,
Jorge.
--
CIMEC-INTEC, http://www.cimec.org.ar/
UNL-CONICET, Guemes 3450, 3000-Santa
--- Comment #2 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-08-31 16:45 ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 41131 ***
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #11 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-08-31 16:45 ---
*** Bug 40224 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41131
--
spop at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |spop at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org
--- Comment #1 from kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-08-31 16:54 ---
*** Bug 41200 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #1 from kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-08-31 16:54 ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 41197 ***
--
kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #7 from eric dot weddington at atmel dot com 2009-08-31 16:55
---
Closing bug as WORKSFORME, as it now know to work on four different release
branches of version 4.
--
eric dot weddington at atmel dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #22 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2009-08-31 16:56 ---
Digging deeper, it smells like a linker error, at least on alpha (please note
that I used -static for final linking to ease debugging a bit):
FDE that corresponds to
_ZN10__gnu_pbds6detail15gp_ht_map_data_INS_4test10basi
--- Comment #23 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2009-08-31 17:11 ---
Perhaps Jakub can help from here...
--
ubizjak at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from michael dot a dot richmond at nasa dot gov 2009-08-31
18:00 ---
If I move "GOTO 50" outside of the block, gfortran 4.5 correctly gives the
message "Warning: Label at (1) is not in the same block as the GOTO statement
at (2)", but gfortran 4.3 and 4.4 give no message.
--- Comment #16 from mrs at apple dot com 2009-08-31 17:37 ---
Oops, I mean #12 and #13. For #13, make sure there isn't an existing entry
already. If there is, the code should be added to it.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41180
--- Comment #25 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2009-08-31 18:23 ---
(In reply to comment #24)
> If you think it is a linker bug, try to see if the LSDA pointer in readelf -wf
> dump is correct when you link with --traditional-format. And, file a binutils
No, with --traditional-format, i
--- Comment #15 from mrs at apple dot com 2009-08-31 17:35 ---
#13 looks fine. #14 needs a build to confirm it works. I've tested the style
of #14 in the gcc-4.2.1 tree and it works as expected.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41180
--- Comment #24 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-08-31 17:17 ---
If you think it is a linker bug, try to see if the LSDA pointer in readelf -wf
dump is correct when you link with --traditional-format. And, file a binutils
bugreport and attach everything needed to reproduce it ther
--- Comment #17 from howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu 2009-08-31
18:04 ---
Mike,
No, there isn't any host cases for i[[3456789]]86-*-darwin* in that section
of configure.ac only...
powerpc-*-darwin*)
host_makefile_frag="config/mh-ppc-darwin"
;;
Interestingly, while Ap
--- Comment #3 from mikael at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-08-31 18:41 ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> I believe that 4.3 and 4.4 had a bug.
bug #38507 probably
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41198
--- Comment #26 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2009-08-31 18:44 ---
Created an attachment (id=18456)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18456&action=view)
alpha dump
This is the dump. Please look for $LSFDE285:
$LSFDE285:
.4byte $LEFDE285-$LASFDE285
$LASFDE285:
--- Comment #4 from kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-08-31 18:58 ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> If I move "GOTO 50" outside of the block, gfortran 4.5 correctly gives the
> message "Warning: Label at (1) is not in the same block as the GOTO statement
> at (2)", but gfortran 4.3 and 4.4
--- Comment #27 from ubizjak at gmail dot com 2009-08-31 19:01 ---
(In reply to comment #26)
> The line that will fail to link to correct LSDA is marked with >>>.
This issue is reported in binutils bugzilla as Bug 10579 [1].
[1] http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10579
-
--- Comment #5 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-08-31 19:08 ---
Subject: Bug 40940
Author: janus
Date: Mon Aug 31 19:08:03 2009
New Revision: 151244
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=151244
Log:
2009-08-31 Janus Weil
Paul Thomas
PR fo
--- Comment #6 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-08-31 19:19 ---
r151244 fixes comment #3 and #4. The items in comment #2 have to wait for a
full implementation of polymorphism. Closing.
--
janus at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |A
--- Comment #6 from ktietz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-08-31 19:29 ---
Created an attachment (id=18457)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18457&action=view)
Remove cast warnings for target with sizeof (void *)>sizeof(long)
If define __INTPTR_TYPE__ is present, this pat
--- Comment #12 from ktietz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-08-31 19:49 ---
(In reply to comment #11)
> Created an attachment (id=17259)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=17259&action=view) [edit]
> Kai's attempt
>
> This patch has a few caveats:
>
> You can't use the win
--- Comment #13 from ktietz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-08-31 19:52 ---
As the change is already applied to head, I close this.
--
ktietz at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #3 from dbaron at dbaron dot org 2009-08-31 20:01 ---
Created an attachment (id=18458)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=18458&action=view)
another testcase
Here's another testcase that I just simplified from my attempts to use, in
Mozilla, some SSE2 code w
I'm really not sure what component this goes in; apologies if it's wrong.
The following testcase:
=== BEGIN pragma.c ===
#ifdef __SSE2__
#error "SSE2 should not be defined"
#endif
#pragma GCC push_options
#pragma GCC target ("sse2")
#ifndef __SSE2__
#error "SSE2 should be defined"
#endif
#p
--- Comment #18 from mrs at apple dot com 2009-08-31 20:37 ---
That file just has:
# APPLE LOCAL file dynamic-no-pic
# The -mdynamic-no-pic ensures that the compiler executable is built without
# position-independent-code -- the usual default on Darwin.
BOOT_CFLAGS=-g -O2 -mdynamic-no-
--
jason at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |jason at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org
In general, it seems that the -m{,no-}{mmx,sse,sse2,sse3,ssse3} (etc.) options
also turn on any options that the option being turned on "depends on", or turn
off any options that "depend on" the option being turned off. (I'm not sure
what the definition of "depend on" is exactly, but I'd note that
--- Comment #3 from jason at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-08-31 21:08 ---
Subject: Bug 41127
Author: jason
Date: Mon Aug 31 21:08:33 2009
New Revision: 151246
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=151246
Log:
PR c++/41127
* parser.c (cp_parser_enum_specifier
--- Comment #4 from jason at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-08-31 21:20 ---
Subject: Bug 41127
Author: jason
Date: Mon Aug 31 21:20:07 2009
New Revision: 151247
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=151247
Log:
PR c++/41127
* parser.c (cp_parser_enum_specifier
--- Comment #5 from jason at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-08-31 21:21 ---
Fixed.
--
jason at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40775
--- Comment #4 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-08-31 21:47
---
HJ, this doesn't make sense.
Either we can assume 16-byte stack alignment, or we can't. Which is it?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41156
--- Comment #8 from dodji at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-08-31 21:48 ---
Subject: Bug 30161
Author: dodji
Date: Mon Aug 31 21:48:04 2009
New Revision: 151249
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=151249
Log:
Emit DWARF for template parameters (PR debug/30161)
ChangeLog:
--- Comment #32 from mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-08-31 21:48
---
Can anyone confirm that this is fixed?
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40808
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41038
--
mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41153
--- Comment #9 from dodji at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-08-31 21:55 ---
Fixed in trunk.
This patch implements some GNU extensions to represent template parameter packs
and template template parameters. The extension is documented at
http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/TemplateParmsDwarf .
Now I gues
--- Comment #2 from dodji at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-08-31 21:59 ---
I think this bug should be fixed in trunk (4.5) by the patch for PR
debug/30161.
Can we close this bug or should we wait for GDB ?
--
dodji at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #3 from bangerth at gmail dot com 2009-08-31 22:05 ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> I think this bug should be fixed in trunk (4.5) by the patch for PR
> debug/30161.
> Can we close this bug or should we wait for GDB ?
What does GDB currently say for the testcase shown in the
Le 01/09/2009 00:05, bangerth at gmail dot com a écrit :
> What does GDB currently say for the testcase shown in the initial report?
I think GDB doesn't know about the new type debug information added by gcc
yet. So it won't say anything. But I haven't test GDB HEAD. My reasoning
was that maybe w
--- Comment #4 from dodji at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-08-31 22:14 ---
Subject: Re: Emit debug information about non-type template
parameters
Le 01/09/2009 00:05, bangerth at gmail dot com a écrit :
> What does GDB currently say for the testcase shown in the initial report?
I think G
--- Comment #5 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-08-31 22:25 ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> HJ, this doesn't make sense.
>
> Either we can assume 16-byte stack alignment, or we can't. Which is it?
>
On ia32, except for MacOS, we don't enforce 16-byte stack alignment.
We get
--- Comment #5 from bangerth at gmail dot com 2009-08-31 22:49 ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> > What does GDB currently say for the testcase shown in the initial report?
>
> I think GDB doesn't know about the new type debug information added by gcc
> yet. So it won't say anything.
I ju
There seems to be a tree-ssa related structure member assignment problem that
affects gcc -m32 -{O,O2,O3,Os} -mtune=pentium2 but apparently nothing else.
Removing the if statement out of the set_foo function also avoids the bug.
Screen shot:
$ gcc --version
gcc (GCC) 4.5.0 20090809 (experiment
--- Comment #28 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-08-31 23:09
---
This may be related to PR 37144.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41058
--- Comment #28 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2009-08-31 23:59 ---
Following Richard Guenther's suggestion on IRC, I have tested the following
patch:
--- ../_gcc_clean/gcc/builtins.c2009-08-31 15:07:18.0 +0200
+++ gcc/builtins.c 2009-09-01 01:28:09.0 +0
--- Comment #10 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-09-01 00:35
---
Target optimization has many issues. See PR 37565.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41153
Hi,
When I compile this C code:
#include
inline int mid_pred(int a, int b, int c)
{
int t= (a-b)&((a-b)>>31);
a-=t;
b+=t;
b-= (b-c)&((b-c)>>31);
b+= (a-b)&((a-b)>>31);
return b;
}
I get this asm output from GCC 4.3.2 (-m68060 -fomit-frame-pointer -O[2/3]):
#NO_APP
Revision 151249 broke bootstrap on i686-apple-darwin9:
gcc -g -fkeep-inline-functions -DIN_GCC -W -Wall -Wwrite-strings -Wcast-qual
-Wstrict-prototypes -Wmissing-prototypes -Wmissing-format-attribute
-Wold-style-definition -fno-common -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -o cc1-dummy c-lang.o
stub-objc.o attribs.
--- Comment #1 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2009-09-01 01:09 ---
>From http://linux.die.net/man/3/strnlen:
...
Conforming to
This function is a GNU extension.
...
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41205
gcc 4.4.0 has a segfault ("t.c:5: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault")
when compiling the following source file, which has no includes or preprocessor
directives:
- t.c -
#pragma GCC optimize ("O0")
int main(void) {
myfunc(0);
}
#pragma GCC optimize ("O2")
- t.c -
Com
--- Comment #1 from benhoyt+gccbugzilla at gmail dot com 2009-09-01 02:04
---
Just an off-topic comment from a first-time bug reporter ... With spam the
problem that it is, why does GCC Bugzilla show my email address in the clear
and unmunged when I report a bug?
--
http://gcc.gnu.
--- Comment #6 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-01 03:02
---
Subject: Bug 39229
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Tue Sep 1 03:02:07 2009
New Revision: 151258
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=151258
Log:
2009-08-31 Jerry DeLisle
PR fortran/39229
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-01 03:21 ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> Just an off-topic comment from a first-time bug reporter ... With spam the
> problem that it is, why does GCC Bugzilla show my email address in the clear
> and unmunged when I report a bug?
--- Comment #3 from benhoyt+gccbugzilla at gmail dot com 2009-09-01 03:25
---
(In reply to comment #2)
> It only shows [your email address] on the web interface.
> The mail that goes out is mangled.
Isn't that the opposite of what it should be? The web interface is public,
visible by s
--- Comment #19 from howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu 2009-09-01
04:00 ---
Actually comment 14 has it backwards. If we implement the config.guess
correction so that the host reports the default code generation and execution
as x86_64-apple-darwin*, we would need something like...
--- Comment #20 from howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu 2009-09-01
04:23 ---
This appears to do what we want on Snow Leopard in combination with the
config.guess patch...
Index: configure.ac
===
--- configure.ac
--- Comment #14 from jv244 at cam dot ac dot uk 2009-09-01 06:56 ---
I wanted to try Vladimir Makarov's new patch for this testcase, but on an
unpatched trunk I notice a serious runtime regression with '-fschedule-insns'
with respect to 4.3.3
Using as base options (for the attached test
88 matches
Mail list logo
