--- Comment #28 from jb at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-02 09:23 ---
Subject: Bug 42131
Author: jb
Date: Wed Dec 2 09:22:50 2009
New Revision: 154900
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=154900
Log:
Typo in ChangeLog entry for PR fortran/42131
Modified:
trunk/gcc/
Hi,
I use Fedora 12 and gcc+Qt4+KDevelop to develop programs. I don't know if this
is a real gcc bug but I think that should notify about the problem.
My compilations is very very slow after I upgrade to this version.
A normal compilation takes 1 or 2 minutes now takes a 30 or more minutes and
al
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.5.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42243
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42244
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||matz at gcc dot gnu dot org
Component|tree-optimization
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-02 12:04 ---
actually selective scheduling is new, so not a regression
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #1 from redi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-02 12:06 ---
Use -ftime-report and -time to see what step is taking a long time, and compare
that the times on the old system
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42252
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-02 12:07 ---
ipa-type-escape is broken anyway...
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||rejects-valid
Summary|failure detecting constant |[4.5 Re
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-02 12:10 ---
Please report the bug to Fedora instead.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41491
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42038
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42164
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42178
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Priority|P3 |P1
http:
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42205
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42211
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42215
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42216
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42228
--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-02 12:16 ---
Mine.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42234
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42243
--- Comment #3 from dje at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-02 12:35 ---
Yes
--
dje at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED
--- Comment #4 from dje at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-02 12:36 ---
I believe the bootstrap failure should be fixed. Please let me know about the
testsuite results.
--
dje at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
I see this nasty miscompilation with the latest gcc from subversion, as well
as with GNAT GPL 2009 and 2008 but not 2007.
$ gnatmake crash.adb
gcc -c crash.adb
gcc -c p64.adb
gnatbind -x crash.ali
gnatlink crash.ali
$ ./crash
raised STORAGE_ERROR : stack overflow (or erroneous memory access)
--
--- Comment #11 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-02 13:16
---
The patch didn't change performance. For the relevant functions I see
mv-search.c:452:1: warning: failing block due to bad pattern
(the location seems to be always the end of the function though).
The insns are
--- Comment #12 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-02 13:16
---
Created an attachment (id=19208)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=19208&action=view)
basic-block that is rejected
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42216
--- Comment #10 from jason at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-02 13:50 ---
Fixed.
--
jason at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #5 from uweigand at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-02 13:51
---
Subject: Bug 42224
Author: uweigand
Date: Wed Dec 2 13:50:52 2009
New Revision: 154908
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=154908
Log:
gcc/
PR middle-end/42224
* tree.h (int_or_
--- Comment #6 from uweigand at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-02 13:52
---
Fixed.
--
uweigand at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGN
--- Comment #5 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2009-12-02 13:54 ---
See http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2009-12/msg00147.html for results at
revision 154892.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42243
>From pr41988
Comment # 21:
The debug failures are gone now at -m32 for x86_64-apple-darwin10, but I am now
seeing a whole new slew of failures at r154891 in check-g++.
...
Comment #24:
> This new breakage is universal. It is showing up on linux as well.
between revisions 154889 and 154891:
--- Comment #37 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-02 14:31 ---
Subject: Bug 3187
Author: jakub
Date: Wed Dec 2 14:31:21 2009
New Revision: 154912
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=154912
Log:
Fix a backport glitch for PR c++/3187.
Modified:
branches/re
--- Comment #25 from dodji at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-02 14:45 ---
Created an attachment (id=19209)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=19209&action=view)
Draft fix for the ICEs
FWIW, this patch seems to fix the ICEs that were introduced by
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs
The attached program fails when compiled with -fprofile-arcs -O2. This is a
unit test of a matrix library, and by failing I mean that it detects a wrong
behavior.
Valgrind reports an "Conditional jump or move depends on uninitialised
value(s)".
It works fine with gcc 4.2.4 and 4.4.1 regardless of
--- Comment #13 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-02 14:47
---
Middle-end issue actually - we are leaking arithmetic in TYPE_DOMAIN.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-02 14:48 ---
Showing up everywhere. The patch cannot be possibly have passed bootstrap
and regtesting.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #1 from gael dot guennebaud at gmail dot com 2009-12-02 14:48
---
Created an attachment (id=19210)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=19210&action=view)
the preprocessed test program
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42255
--- Comment #26 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2009-12-02 14:52 ---
(In reply to comment #25)
> Draft fix for the ICEs
Note that I have opened pr42254 for this issue.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41988
--- Comment #2 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2009-12-02 14:53 ---
A patch has been posted in comment #25 of pr41988.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42254
--- Comment #5 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-02 15:22 ---
Fixed.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #6 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-02 15:22 ---
Subject: Bug 42229
Author: rguenth
Date: Wed Dec 2 15:22:01 2009
New Revision: 154914
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=154914
Log:
2009-12-02 Richard Guenther
PR middle-end/42229
--- Comment #1 from bosch at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-02 15:34 ---
This base type is indeed too large. This is not a bug.
--
bosch at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #1 from paolo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-02 15:49 ---
Subject: Bug 34836
Author: paolo
Date: Wed Dec 2 15:49:20 2009
New Revision: 154915
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=154915
Log:
2009-12-02 Paolo Bonzini
Shujing Zhao
P
--- Comment #2 from paolo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-02 15:49 ---
Subject: Bug 29917
Author: paolo
Date: Wed Dec 2 15:49:20 2009
New Revision: 154915
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=154915
Log:
2009-12-02 Paolo Bonzini
Shujing Zhao
P
--- Comment #2 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-12-02 15:54
---
Fixed for 4.5.0.
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-12-02 15:55
---
Fixed for 4.5.0.
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from bosch at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-02 15:59 ---
This was a front end bug, the -gnatG output already showed that all code was
eliminated. I tried to find when it got fixed, but am not sure.
--
bosch at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #11 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2009-12-02
16:07 ---
Subject: Re: [4.5 Regression] Internal error compiling fortran/intrinsic.c
> Why is this a regression? Does it work with 4.4 and checking enabled?
> Does it work with current trunk and release checking?
--- Comment #13 from bernds_cb1 at t-online dot de 2009-12-02 16:28 ---
Created an attachment (id=19211)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=19211&action=view)
Patch to make it less conservative when accepting matching constraints with
different modes
--
http://gcc.g
--- Comment #14 from bernds_cb1 at t-online dot de 2009-12-02 16:29 ---
Would you mind trying another patch, both for testing performance, and if that
fails, for interesting warnings?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42216
--- Comment #15 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-02 16:57
---
With the second patch there are no warnings when building 464.h264ref (I have
reverted the first patch before installing the 2nd, it didn't apply cleanly
otherwise). Performance is back to normal with the patch ap
--- Comment #16 from bernds_cb1 at t-online dot de 2009-12-02 17:06 ---
Thanks for testing. This means the regression is fixed by the patch? I'll do
a full test run then.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42216
--- Comment #17 from rguenther at suse dot de 2009-12-02 17:07 ---
Subject: Re: [4.5 Regression] changes in scheduling
regress 464.h264ref 20%
On Wed, 2 Dec 2009, bernds_cb1 at t-online dot de wrote:
> --- Comment #16 from bernds_cb1 at t-online dot de 2009-12-02 17:06
> --
--- Comment #17 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-02 17:14
---
Subject: Bug 42088
Author: rguenth
Date: Wed Dec 2 17:13:51 2009
New Revision: 154918
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=154918
Log:
2009-12-02 Richard Guenther
PR middle-end/42088
--- Comment #18 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-02 17:16
---
Fixed.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNE
--- Comment #10 from sje at cup dot hp dot com 2009-12-02 17:20 ---
This bug appears to be fixed on all my PA and IPF targets.
Closing out as fixed.
--
sje at cup dot hp dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|debug |middle-end
Keywords||wrong-code
--- Comment #4 from law at redhat dot com 2009-12-02 17:41 ---
Created an attachment (id=19212)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=19212&action=view)
patch for frame-pointerless mcount
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41998
--- Comment #3 from janis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-02 18:10 ---
The option -fipa-type-escape is not documented on its own, just with
-fipa-struct-reorg which says it's needed with that option. Shouldn't broken
options at least be documented as experimental?
--
http://gcc.gnu.
--- Comment #3 from rwgk at yahoo dot com 2009-12-02 18:15 ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> Yeah,
> yum install glibc-devel.i686
> in F12 case.
>
Thank you very much! This is exactly what I needed.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42247
--- Comment #14 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-02 18:15
---
Fixed.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNE
--- Comment #15 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-02 18:15
---
Subject: Bug 41491
Author: rguenth
Date: Wed Dec 2 18:15:17 2009
New Revision: 154920
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=154920
Log:
2009-12-02 Richard Guenther
PR middle-end/41491
--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-02 18:18 ---
Yes, probably a boilerplate like
@item -fipa-type-escape
@opindex fipa-type-escape
Perform interprocedural type escape analysis. This option is experimental
and does not affect generated code.
a patch to do so is
g++ -O2 -DSPEC_CPU_LP64AIXPlatformUtils.o XalanExe.o -o Xalan
ICUResHandler.o: In function `non-virtual thunk to
xercesc_2_5::DefaultHandler::~DefaultHandler()':ICUResHandler.cpp:(.text+0x0):
multiple definition of `non-virtual thunk to
xercesc_2_5::DefaultHandler::~DefaultHandler()'
s
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.5.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42256
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-02 19:13 ---
Bad rev. is 154902, good is rev. 154872.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42256
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-02 19:16 ---
HJ has it first failing with rev. 154892 and last good with rev. 154873.
Looks like the C++ comdat changes.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-02 19:26 ---
Confirmed.
--
rth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED
--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-02 19:39 ---
Created an attachment (id=19213)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=19213&action=view)
readelf -Wa ICUResHandler.o sax2Dummy.o
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42256
--- Comment #9 from tromey at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-02 19:40 ---
Created an attachment (id=19214)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=19214&action=view)
patch for readelf
This is an updated readelf patch.
Now "readelf -wI" works properly.
--
tromey at gcc dot g
--- Comment #4 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-02 19:56 ---
Created an attachment (id=19215)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=19215&action=view)
gcc45-pr42256.patch
Seems to be Honza's fault.
emit_associated_thunks shouldn't be called before expand_or_defer_
--
rth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |rth at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org
The incorrect code below causes an segmentation fault in the latest gfortran. I
am using
gcc version 4.5.0 20091130 (experimental) [trunk revision 154853] (GCC)
The program compiles and works if I make the type "time" public. However, an
error message would be nice.
Code:
MODULE run_example_for
--- Comment #3 from rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-02 22:35 ---
Subject: Bug 42215
Author: rth
Date: Wed Dec 2 22:35:21 2009
New Revision: 154925
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=154925
Log:
PR tree-opt/42215
* tree-loop-distribution.c (build_s
--- Comment #4 from rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-02 22:42 ---
Fixed.
--
rth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--
rth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |rth at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org
--- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-02 23:46 ---
This works for me on i386-darwin8 so maybe it is a darwin9 specific issue. Do
they fail for you anymore?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40543
--- Comment #3 from rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-03 00:23 ---
Note that f23 and f49 are fixed in gcc 4.5, probably by the fix to PR8603.
The f5 test continues to have the unneeded extend.
--
rth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |A
--- Comment #3 from rth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-03 00:32 ---
Gcc 4.5 has regressed this even further:
extwl $16,2,$1
xor $1,$16,$16
addl $31,$16,$16 << signextend
zapnot $16,15,$1 << zeroextend of signextend
srl $1,8,$1
Neither extensi
--- Comment #8 from dje at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-03 01:33 ---
The support in GCC trunk now is feature complete and operational.
--
dje at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #6 from dje at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-03 01:44 ---
Darwin and AIX share most of the C code and the assembly files are nearly
identical for 32 bit support, except for the format of calls. The results on
AIX now are clean. I cannot see any reason for the difference betwe
--- Comment #3 from howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu 2009-12-03
03:04 ---
We still are seeing a few residual failures on x86_64-apple-darwin10 even after
the removal of Taras Glek's patches from gcc trunk. The remaining failures
are...
FAIL: g++.old-deja/g++.eh/badalloc1.C execu
--- Comment #4 from howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu 2009-12-03
03:11 ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> We still are seeing a few residual failures on x86_64-apple-darwin10 even
> after
> the removal of Taras Glek's patches from gcc trunk. The remaining failures
> are...
>
> FAIL:
Compile following function with options -march=armv5te -mthumb -Os
int mulx(int x)
{
return x*42;
}
Gcc generates:
mulx:
mov r2, #42
mov r3, r2//A
mul r3, r0
@ sp needed for prologue
mov r0, r3//B
bx lr
There are two
--- Comment #1 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-03 04:07
---
I plan to keep poking at this and other general constructor issues.
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from hp at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-03 04:08 ---
Reappeared as described in (154917:154920] (which are non-specific changes)
Just keeping track, at the moment.
--
hp at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from hp at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-03 04:09 ---
Forgot to mention that it had previously been hidden with a change in
(151359..151366].
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41087
--- Comment #5 from howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu 2009-12-03
04:26 ---
The bracket for these residual g++ failures on x86_64-apple-darwin10 is as
follows...
r154715 - not present
r154729 - present
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42254
--- Comment #27 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-03 05:02
---
These have been fixed so closing.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #6 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-03 05:05 ---
>FAIL: g++.old-deja/g++.eh/badalloc1.C execution test
Those are only happen on i686-darwin10, please file a different bug as it is a
hugely different issue. They work on i386-darwin8.
The rest of the failures in
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-03 05:17 ---
Interesting it works for LP32 targets.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42166
On x86_64-apple-darwin10, we are seeing the following regressions in current
gcc trunk...
FAIL: g++.old-deja/g++.eh/badalloc1.C execution test
FAIL: g++.old-deja/g++.eh/fntry1.C execution test
FAIL: g++.old-deja/g++.eh/rethrow3.C execution test
FAIL: g++.old-deja/g++.eh/vbase1.C execution test
FAI
--- Comment #4 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-03 05:32 ---
More interesting is that if I turn off IV-opts, it works.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42166
--- Comment #12 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-03 05:33 ---
Subject: Bug 42104
Author: pault
Date: Thu Dec 3 05:32:58 2009
New Revision: 154935
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=154935
Log:
2009-12-03 Paul Thomas
Janus Weil
PR f
--- Comment #4 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-03 05:33 ---
Subject: Bug 41829
Author: pault
Date: Thu Dec 3 05:32:58 2009
New Revision: 154935
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=154935
Log:
2009-12-03 Paul Thomas
Janus Weil
PR fo
--- Comment #1 from howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu 2009-12-03
06:15 ---
Nevermind. I forgot I had a test patch in my local svn to us revert...
Index: libgcc/config/t-slibgcc-darwin
===
--- libgcc/config/t-slibgcc
--- Comment #5 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2009-12-03 07:20 ---
> Do they fail for you anymore?
No since revision 151159 actually (the last revision I have with the failures
is 151000): another silent fix!
Closing.
--
dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr changed:
What
--- Comment #1 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-03 07:32 ---
Confirmed. The ICE's backtrace is
#0 0x00504bcf in load_derived_extensions () at
/home/jweil/gcc45/trunk/gcc/fortran/module.c:4019
#1 0x00505938 in read_module () at
/home/jweil/gcc45/trunk/gcc/fortr
100 matches
Mail list logo
