--- Comment #5 from spop at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-14 08:15 ---
Subject: Bug 42681
Author: spop
Date: Thu Jan 14 08:15:09 2010
New Revision: 155883
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=155883
Log:
Fix PR42681.
2010-01-14 Sebastian Pop
PR middle-end/42
--- Comment #6 from spop at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-14 08:37 ---
Subject: Bug 42681
Author: spop
Date: Thu Jan 14 08:37:26 2010
New Revision: 155884
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=155884
Log:
Fix PR42681.
2010-01-14 Sebastian Pop
PR middle-end/42
--- Comment #7 from spop at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-14 08:38 ---
Fixed.
--
spop at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #3 from spop at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-14 08:41 ---
Mine.
--
spop at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gc
--- Comment #6 from spop at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-14 08:41 ---
Mine.
--
spop at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gc
--- Comment #2 from spop at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-14 08:44 ---
This might be a duplicate of PR42130.
--
spop at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Bu
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.4.3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42691
--- Comment #16 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-14 09:39
---
Subject: Bug 42665
Author: rguenth
Date: Thu Jan 14 09:38:56 2010
New Revision: 155885
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=155885
Log:
2010-01-14 Richard Guenther
PR lto/42665
--- Comment #7 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-14 09:46 ---
Subject: Bug 42667
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Jan 14 09:46:04 2010
New Revision: 155886
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=155886
Log:
Backport from mainline
2010-01-10 Richard Guenth
--- Comment #17 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-14 09:46
---
Fixed.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNE
--- Comment #9 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-14 09:47 ---
Subject: Bug 42721
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Jan 14 09:47:09 2010
New Revision: 155887
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=155887
Log:
PR c/42721
Port from no-undefined-overflow branch
--- Comment #10 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-14 09:48 ---
Subject: Bug 42721
Author: jakub
Date: Thu Jan 14 09:48:01 2010
New Revision: 155888
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=155888
Log:
PR c/42721
Port from no-undefined-overflow branc
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
Target Milestone|--- |4.5.0
http://gcc
--- Comment #12 from abhishekfishy2000 at gmail dot com 2010-01-14 10:03
---
lfs:~/SOURCES/gcc-build$ cat /proc/version
Linux version 2.6.18-164.el5 (mockbu...@x86-002.build.bos.redhat.com) (gcc
version 4.1.2 20080704 (Red Hat 4.1.2-46)) #1 SMP Tue Aug 18 15:51:54 EDT 2009
lfs:~/SOURCE
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-14 10:04 ---
Maybe related to PR42698.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-14 10:06 ---
Looking at my old builds,
it seems to work with 2008-11-14-r141848
but it fails with 2008-11-18-r141960
Thus possible regression-causing patches:
PR 38033 - Bounds of a pointer/allocatable array not stabilized
--- Comment #13 from abhishekfishy2000 at gmail dot com 2010-01-14 10:06
---
(In reply to comment #11)
> GNU make is required for building gcc.
>
I'm using lfs:~/SOURCES/gcc-build$ make --version
GNU Make 3.81
Copyright (C) 2006 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
This is free software; s
--- Comment #8 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-14 10:14 ---
Reduced testcase from PR42725:
namespace Glib {
class ustring {
public:
typedef unsigned size_type;
ustring(const char* src, size_type n);
ustring(const char* src);
};
}
namespace
--- Comment #8 from abel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-14 10:16 ---
Subject: Bug 42294
Author: abel
Date: Thu Jan 14 10:16:01 2010
New Revision: 155889
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=155889
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/42294
* sel-sched.c (try_replac
--- Comment #9 from abel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-14 10:17 ---
Fixed by r155889.
--
abel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSI
--- Comment #4 from jwakely dot gcc at gmail dot com 2010-01-14 10:21
---
Obviously it shouldn't ICE, but I don't think this code is valid: the type of a
lambda expression is a class type not a function pointer, and I don't think
it's convertible to a function pointer.
--
http://gc
--- Comment #1 from abel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-14 10:24 ---
This is fixed by http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42294#c8, there
was a typo in the bug number so the email didn't get in this audit trail.
--
abel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Rem
In a larger program of mine, I got a SIGSEGV when printing
WRITE(*,fmtstr)
& dat(1),"-",dat(2),"-",dat(3),
& datedelim,dat(4),":",dat(5),
& (delim,bufarr(pindx),pindx=1,anzarg2)
with gfortran 4.5 (latest snapshot). Using gfortran 4.3.5 the code r
--- Comment #9 from amonakov at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-14 10:29
---
Subject: Bug 42245
Author: amonakov
Date: Thu Jan 14 10:28:47 2010
New Revision: 155890
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=155890
Log:
2010-01-14 Andrey Belevantsev
Alexander Mon
--- Comment #2 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-14 10:31 ---
This does indeed look like PR42698. The pattern of backwards branching
indirect jumps is the same, and I'm pretty sure that this is the test case to
fix.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42739
--- Comment #10 from amonakov at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-14 10:38
---
Subject: Bug 42245
Author: amonakov
Date: Thu Jan 14 10:38:14 2010
New Revision: 155891
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=155891
Log:
Add tests missing from previous commit.
PR middl
--- Comment #6 from amonakov at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-14 10:40
---
Subject: Bug 39453
Author: amonakov
Date: Thu Jan 14 10:40:19 2010
New Revision: 155892
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=155892
Log:
2010-01-14 Alexander Monakov
PR rtl-optimizati
--- Comment #5 from amonakov at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-14 10:40
---
Subject: Bug 42246
Author: amonakov
Date: Thu Jan 14 10:40:19 2010
New Revision: 155892
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=155892
Log:
2010-01-14 Alexander Monakov
PR rtl-optimizati
--- Comment #11 from amonakov at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-14 10:41
---
Fixed by revision 155890
--
amonakov at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #7 from amonakov at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-14 10:44
---
Fixed by revision 155892
--
amonakov at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #10 from amonakov at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-14 10:47
---
Subject: Bug 42294
Author: amonakov
Date: Thu Jan 14 10:46:57 2010
New Revision: 155893
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=155893
Log:
2010-01-14 Alexander Monakov
PR rtl-optimizat
--- Comment #4 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-14 10:56 ---
Regression bisecting on the 4.3 branch shows that PR 35681 is the culprit; to
be precise: Commit Rev. 142154 - maybe that helps to find the issue.
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=revision&revision=142154
PR f
--- Comment #4 from abel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-14 11:02 ---
Subject: Bug 42388
Author: abel
Date: Thu Jan 14 11:02:18 2010
New Revision: 155894
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=155894
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/42388
* sel-sched-ir.c (maybe_t
--- Comment #3 from abel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-14 11:07 ---
Subject: Bug 42389
Author: abel
Date: Thu Jan 14 11:07:39 2010
New Revision: 155895
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=155895
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/42389
* sel-sched.c (advance_on
--- Comment #5 from abel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-14 11:08 ---
Fixed.
--
abel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #4 from abel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-14 11:09 ---
Fixed.
--
abel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #5 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-14 11:10 ---
The crucial difference between 142153 and 142154 seems to be that the former
uses table->realdata.data directly, while the latter creates a "atmp"
descriptor, which does not fill .dim[1].stride:
table->realdata.
--- Comment #5 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2010-01-14 11:13
---
Does it matter that lambdas with no-capture are special, per n2989? (also see
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-10/msg01690.html)
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42737
--- Comment #6 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-14 11:18 ---
The problem seems to be that for the tmp array, one has a RANK 1 array:
"realdata(:,1)"
thus gfc_trans_create_temp_array only gets info->dimen == 1 and thus it only
fills the data for rank 1. However, the stride for
--- Comment #6 from abel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-14 11:22 ---
Subject: Bug 42246
Author: abel
Date: Thu Jan 14 11:22:20 2010
New Revision: 155900
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=155900
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/42246
* sel-sched-ir.h (get_all
--- Comment #7 from abel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-14 11:23 ---
Fixed by the above patches.
--
abel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
S
--- Comment #1 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-14 11:30 ---
Hmm, without test case, it is quite difficult to debug. Though, maybe Jerry
gets an idea from the backtrace.
Can't you write out "fmtstr" & create a program with "fmtstr" set such, set
anzarg2 and call the same WRITE
--- Comment #5 from abel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-14 11:32 ---
With the recent patches to sel-sched, testcases from comments #3 and #4 do not
longer fail for me. I'm still seeing the spill failure of the original report
though.
--
abel at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-14 11:56 ---
The issue is we have an invalid CFG:
{
int D.2137;
Invalid sum of incoming frequencies 1, should be 5000
M:
:
[LP 2] f ();
:
[LP 3] f ();
goto ;
L:
: [LP 3]
goto ();
note the block with two labe
This code:
#include
template
void x()
{
vec_t tmp1 = vec_t(); // Works with myvec, causes error with __m128
vec_t tmp2 = {}; // Causes warnings about uninitialized members in
myvec
vec_t tmp3; // This may cause a warning about use of
uninitialized variables if tmp3 is
--- Comment #7 from paul dot richard dot thomas at gmail dot com
2010-01-14 12:04 ---
Subject: Re: [4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression] Wrong-code with
allocatable compounds
Dear Tobias,
I am just leaving on a trip. As it happens, I copied this PR onto my
memory stick, so I will have a
--- Comment #8 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-14 12:09 ---
Fixed.
--
jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
--- Comment #4 from debian-gcc at lists dot debian dot org 2010-01-14
12:30 ---
fixed on the branch
--
debian-gcc at lists dot debian dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #6 from jwakely dot gcc at gmail dot com 2010-01-14 12:30
---
(In reply to comment #5)
> Does it matter that lambdas with no-capture are special, per n2989? (also see
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-10/msg01690.html)
>
ah yes, that would make it valid! I wasn't a
In a larger program of mine, I got a SIGSEGV when printing
WRITE(*,fmtstr)
& dat(1),"-",dat(2),"-",dat(3),
& datedelim,dat(4),":",dat(5),
& (delim,bufarr(pindx),pindx=1,anzarg2)
with gfortran 4.5 (latest snapshot). Using gfortran 4.3.5 the code r
--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-14 12:33 ---
Let's hope there's not more fallout of
Index: gcc/tree-cfg.c
===
--- gcc/tree-cfg.c (revision 155893)
+++ gcc/tree-cfg.c (working copy)
@@ -4
--- Comment #1 from jwakely dot gcc at gmail dot com 2010-01-14 12:36
---
(In reply to comment #0)
> vec_t tmp2 = {}; // Causes warnings about uninitialized members in
> myvec
The warning doesn't smean it's uninitialized, just that there are not
initializers present for all m
--- Comment #1 from manfred99 at gmx dot ch 2010-01-14 12:42 ---
Created an attachment (id=19596)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=19596&action=view)
test case
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42744
--- Comment #2 from manfred99 at gmx dot ch 2010-01-14 12:43 ---
This write statement is called in a loop, and it crashes at the
second iteration.
I did first a test case with only this write statement, and it
works OK.
Then, I put a loop around it, and I catched it!
So the attached tes
--- Comment #7 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-14 12:59 ---
Fixed.
--
jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #2 from manfred99 at gmx dot ch 2010-01-14 12:59 ---
*** Bug 42744 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42742
--- Comment #3 from manfred99 at gmx dot ch 2010-01-14 12:59 ---
Sorry, I made a mess.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 42742 ***
--
manfred99 at gmx dot ch changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #3 from manfred99 at gmx dot ch 2010-01-14 13:01 ---
See http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42744
for comments and test case.
Sorry.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42742
--- Comment #4 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-14 13:06
---
I will take this one.
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-14 13:23
---
This is related to format caching and the length of the format string.
Something like this:
fmtstr="(i4,4(a1,i2.2),10(a1,a12))"
Is a work around until I fix this, unless of course the test case is contriv
--
burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
OtherBugsDependingO||32834
nThis||
Known to
--- Comment #5 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-14 13:30 ---
Subject: Bug 42714
Author: jamborm
Date: Thu Jan 14 13:29:44 2010
New Revision: 155905
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=155905
Log:
2010-01-14 Martin Jambor
PR tree-optimization/427
--- Comment #6 from manfred99 at gmx dot ch 2010-01-14 13:44 ---
fmtstr is put together at runtime, each column may (and actually does
sometimes) have different width (minimal width to save space), so
- no, your work around does not work for me
- no, this example is not contrived
- in so
--- Comment #9 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-14 13:45
---
The test case in comment #8 is a separate issue. The constructor pointer is
coming out of find_component_ref as invalid. I am still working on it.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41044
--- Comment #6 from JamesMikeDuPont at googlemail dot com 2010-01-14 13:55
---
I am having this problem as well.
Using the lastest version of g++.
Test like this :
If you include in a pch,
and then in the other file that uses the pch, the macro assert is no longer
there.
--
htt
The gch is segfaulting
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gcc-defaults/+bug/506728
--
Summary: gcc segfaults on gch
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
--- Comment #1 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2010-01-14 14:25
---
Please provide all the required information, in particular the preprocessed
file that triggers the bug (after having checked that current 4_4-branch is
still affected, of course):
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs/
--- Comment #9 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-14 14:34 ---
Ugh.
args = copy_list (args);
simple-minded copies all PARM_DECLs in the function - but of course the
actual functions parameter list is not adjusted, this is only a temporary
list used for parameter setup.
So
--- Comment #2 from simon at pushface dot org 2010-01-14 14:36 ---
Corrected the host & build (to Snow Leopard), for correctness.
--
simon at pushface dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from dodji at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-14 14:39 ---
Here is a smaller reproducer:
template
struct S
{
};
template
struct S0
{
typedef T TT;
};
template
struct super_struct : S0
{
typedef S0 super;
};
template
struct S1 : super_struct
{
typedef s
--- Comment #2 from JamesMikeDuPont at googlemail dot com 2010-01-14 14:51
---
Using the preprocessed headers breaks the pch.
I tried this with the latest 4 4 head I compiled myself, but now it does not
break.
I will continue testing with the latest version.
thanks for you help.
-
--- Comment #6 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-14 15:05 ---
Fixed.
--
jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
AIX ABI by default maps all bitfields to unsigned type regardless of their type
declaration. GCC does not provide any mechanism to control this behavior. XLC
controls this behavior with -qbitfield option.
--
Summary: AIX ABI defaults to unsigned bitfields
Product: gcc
--- Comment #10 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-14 15:15
---
Created an attachment (id=19597)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=19597&action=view)
patch 2)
Implements 2) - can you test that as well? Another possibility would be to
move the split complex h
--- Comment #5 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-14 15:31 ---
Fixed.
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #2 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-14 15:36 ---
The problem here seems to be that trivially_conflicts_p called
insert_backedge_copies returns 0 for -g0 and 1 for -g in:
:
# i_25 = PHI
# DEBUG last => i_25
D.2725_8 = (long unsigned int) i_25;
D.2726_9 = D.2725_8 * 4
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-14 15:43 ---
The patch for PR42739 also fixes this bug. Thus, duplicate.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 42739 ***
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |
--- Comment #5 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-14 15:43 ---
*** Bug 42698 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #11 from pthaugen at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-14 15:45
---
I'll test on PPC.
--
pthaugen at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|tree-optimization |middle-end
Target Milestone|--- |4.5.0
ht
--- Comment #3 from matz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-14 15:56 ---
This code and var-tracking was developed in parallel, that's why debug insns
are sometimes not handled correctly in the new out-of-ssa stuff. In this
case debug insns should probably be ignored, and not lead to claimin
--- Comment #4 from dodji at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-14 15:56 ---
Candidate patch posted to
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-01/msg00666.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42713
--- Comment #1 from dje at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-14 16:02 ---
GCC does provide -funsigned-bitfields but defaults to -fsigned-bitfields. GCC
advocates consistency and does not believe this should be an ABI decision
because it does not affect object layout.
--
dje at gcc dot gnu
--- Comment #5 from jamborm at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-14 16:07 ---
Patch posted to the mailing list:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-01/msg00667.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42706
--- Comment #4 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-14 16:10 ---
Created an attachment (id=19598)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=19598&action=view)
gcc45-pr42719.patch
Big hammer patch to reset the debug stmts because of which we'd return true
from trivially_co
--- Comment #5 from matz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-14 16:17 ---
I don't think the big hammer is necessary. trivially_conflicts_p only is a
heuristic predicate influencing how other code is emitted. That other code
needs to handle them already, otherwise more transformations would
--- Comment #5 from ramana at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-14 16:21 ---
I took a cursory look at this case . This looks like a bug in the
backend specifically in arm_output_epilogue where the epilogue code
isn't designed to cope for restoring disjoint sets of registers from
the stack when
--- Comment #6 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-14 16:21 ---
Correct. Especially resetting debug stmts inside a predicate is extra ugly ;)
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42719
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot
|dot org
--- Comment #5 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2010-01-14 16:34
---
PR42634 is fixed, we can safely close this one too.
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 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=42248
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42655
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42674
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42676
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42677
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42684
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42685
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42701
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42706
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42713
1 - 100 of 184 matches
Mail list logo
