http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49107
--- Comment #11 from Paolo Carlini 2011-06-04
07:05:34 UTC ---
I'm sorry, now I see that typedef. Hum, I'm worried, I have no idea how I coul
possibly simplify or workaround this type of issue in the library, among other
things.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49107
--- Comment #12 from Paolo Carlini 2011-06-04
07:33:15 UTC ---
I'd like to understand as soon as possible if this type of issue means that
these traits cannot really be implemented with sfinae or not. Actually, as
usual, the library is just an ex
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45098
Ramana Radhakrishnan changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ramana at gcc dot gnu.org,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48250
--- Comment #4 from Ramana Radhakrishnan 2011-06-04
08:22:32 UTC ---
A backport to 4.6 shows the following failures -
arm-sim: gcc.c-torture/execute/loop-ivopts-2.c compilation, -O3
-fomit-frame-pointer -funroll-all-loops -finline-functions (i
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45098
--- Comment #13 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-06-04 08:42:29 UTC ---
> Tom can this now be marked as being fixed for 4.7.0 ?
I'm still discussing one patch with Zdenek. Latest gcc-patches mail on this is
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33840
Volker Reichelt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.6.0
--- Comment #2 from Volker Reiche
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49038
--- Comment #5 from irar at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-06-04 09:12:58 UTC ---
Author: irar
Date: Sat Jun 4 09:12:55 2011
New Revision: 174634
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=174634
Log:
PR tree-optimization/49038
* tree-v
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49038
--- Comment #6 from irar at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-06-04 09:20:04 UTC ---
Author: irar
Date: Sat Jun 4 09:20:00 2011
New Revision: 174635
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=174635
Log:
PR tree-optimization/49038
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49038
Ira Rosen changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49107
--- Comment #13 from Marc Glisse 2011-06-04
09:31:40 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #8)
> Here, instantiating
> std::pair> involves evaluating
> noexcept(ploum>::value),
Hello,
I am far from a specialist. Is it necessary to evaluate the noexcept
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48333
--- Comment #5 from Alexandre Oliva 2011-06-04
10:08:12 UTC ---
Author: aoliva
Date: Sat Jun 4 10:08:09 2011
New Revision: 174636
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=174636
Log:
PR debug/48333
* calls.c (emit_call_1): Prefer t
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47590
--- Comment #6 from Alexandre Oliva 2011-06-04
10:15:51 UTC ---
Author: aoliva
Date: Sat Jun 4 10:15:48 2011
New Revision: 174637
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=174637
Log:
PR debug/47590
* target.def (delay_sched2, delay
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48333
Alexandre Oliva changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47590
Alexandre Oliva changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41012
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rguenther at suse dot de
--- Comment #2 fro
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49107
--- Comment #14 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-06-04
12:27:50 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #9)
> But doing this breaks auto_ptr. And v3 future as well, for some reason.
I can take care of any necessary changes to future if you let me know what
break
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49266
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33840
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
Known to work|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48929
--- Comment #2 from Jan Hubicka 2011-06-04
13:02:28 UTC ---
Created attachment 24428
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24428
Pack I am testing
The problem is that the code assumes transitivity in edge predicates, while
this is
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48954
--- Comment #2 from Jan Hubicka 2011-06-04
13:11:40 UTC ---
Hmm,
I don't really get the uninitialized access, instead I now get an ice:
lto1: internal compiler error: vector VEC(cgraph_node_ptr,base) index domain
error, in lto_cgraph_encoder_dere
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48954
--- Comment #3 from Jan Hubicka 2011-06-04
13:15:35 UTC ---
Hmm, updating the tree however gets me to count bits error. The bug above is
alsomost probably inconsistency in cgraph encoder, so it seems like a random
memory corruption shooting into
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49283
Summary: pointless warning with -Wstrict-overflow
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
AssignedTo: unassig...@gc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48954
--- Comment #4 from Jan Hubicka 2011-06-04
13:37:03 UTC ---
Created attachment 24430
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24430
patch I am testing
Hi,
this patch fixes ICE in counting bits of bitmap that is NULL. I am not sure
ho
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49091
--- Comment #2 from Jan Hubicka 2011-06-04
13:56:00 UTC ---
OK, the problem is K&R style definition:
int ssetup(in, out, port)
int *in, *out;
int *port;
{
struct hostent *hp;
struct servent *sp;
struct sockaddr_in myaddr_
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48929
--- Comment #3 from Jan Hubicka 2011-06-04
14:24:24 UTC ---
Author: hubicka
Date: Sat Jun 4 14:24:20 2011
New Revision: 174638
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=174638
Log:
PR tree-optimize/48929
* gcc.c-torture/comp
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48542
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49281
--- Comment #2 from H.J. Lu 2011-06-04 14:57:08
UTC ---
Created attachment 24431
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24431
A testcase
I got
(gdb) r -d foreman_ref_encoder_main.cfg
Starting program: /export/home/hjl/bugs/gcc/pr49
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49281
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.7.0
Summary|lea_general_4 doesn't
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48688
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Blocks|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49281
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49281
--- Comment #5 from H.J. Lu 2011-06-04 15:31:29
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> Created attachment 24432 [details]
> gcc47-pr49281.patch
>
> Yeah, I think it should have be < instead of <=.
> Will try to write some testcase...
This seems to
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49281
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-06-04
15:38:39 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Sat Jun 4 15:38:36 2011
New Revision: 174641
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=174641
Log:
PR target/49281
* config/i386/i386.md (*lea
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49271
--- Comment #9 from Steve Kargl
2011-06-04 15:56:35 UTC ---
On Sat, Jun 04, 2011 at 01:09:06AM +, coml4 at san dot rr.com wrote:
> I will be happy to update the compiler. I very recently downloaded the latest
> one that was labeled "Stable R
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48688
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49281
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33840
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-06-04
16:11:47 UTC ---
Author: redi
Date: Sat Jun 4 16:11:41 2011
New Revision: 174642
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=174642
Log:
2011-06-04 Jonathan Wakely
PR c++/33840
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48954
--- Comment #5 from Jan Hubicka 2011-06-04
16:20:42 UTC ---
Author: hubicka
Date: Sat Jun 4 16:20:36 2011
New Revision: 174644
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=174644
Log:
PR lto/48954
* lto-cgraph.c (output_node_o
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33840
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-06-04
16:21:00 UTC ---
Author: redi
Date: Sat Jun 4 16:20:55 2011
New Revision: 174645
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=174645
Log:
2011-06-04 Jonathan Wakely
PR c++/3384
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49271
--- Comment #10 from Dominique d'Humieres
2011-06-04 16:22:18 UTC ---
> I don't use Mac OS X ...
I do;-) The simplest ways are to build it either with fink (
http://www.finkproject.org/ : gcc4.5.2) or macports ( http://www.macports.org/
: gcc4.5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33840
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=7302
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49279
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48952
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48893
--- Comment #5 from Jan Hubicka 2011-06-04
18:00:51 UTC ---
Author: hubicka
Date: Sat Jun 4 18:00:47 2011
New Revision: 174648
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=174648
Log:
PR tree-optimization/48893
PR tree-optimiza
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49091
--- Comment #3 from Jan Hubicka 2011-06-04
18:00:51 UTC ---
Author: hubicka
Date: Sat Jun 4 18:00:47 2011
New Revision: 174648
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=174648
Log:
PR tree-optimization/48893
PR tree-optimiza
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49179
--- Comment #2 from Jan Hubicka 2011-06-04
18:00:51 UTC ---
Author: hubicka
Date: Sat Jun 4 18:00:47 2011
New Revision: 174648
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=174648
Log:
PR tree-optimization/48893
PR tree-optimiza
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48893
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49179
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48636
--- Comment #14 from Jan Hubicka 2011-06-04
18:06:01 UTC ---
Yeah, the fnspec issue is something we ought to solve. ipa-cp should be
effective on fortran so it should not disable itself there ;)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49091
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48929
Jan Hubicka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
Priority: P3
Component: other
AssignedTo: unassig...@gcc.gnu.org
ReportedBy: andi-...@firstfloor.org
gcc version 4.7.0 20110604 (experimental) (GCC)
Passing -fdump-ipa-cgraph to a IPA final build gives:
lto1: internal compiler error: in generate_canonical_option, at
opts
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49282
--- Comment #1 from Andi Kleen 2011-06-04
19:56:15 UTC ---
Some updates:
I tried with a fresh compiler (20110604). Same malloc assert
I also checked with a somewhat older compiler (from around May 11)
It segfaulted eventually too, so I suspect
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49282
--- Comment #2 from Andi Kleen 2011-06-04
20:57:59 UTC ---
I found a workaround: disabling -fcoverage-arcs (gcov) makes it go
away.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49284
--- Comment #1 from Andi Kleen 2011-06-04
22:13:34 UTC ---
Some investigation:
This depends heavily on the command line used.
A simple test with a hello world works.
On my kernel build when I strip the lto link command line down I get
the erro
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49275
--- Comment #3 from Jack Howarth 2011-06-04
23:20:14 UTC ---
This problem no longer exists at r174648 with
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-05/msg02301.html installed. A
profiledbootstrap BOOT_CFLAGS="-g -O3" CFLAGS_FOR_TARGET="-g -O3"
CXXF
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49107
--- Comment #15 from Jason Merrill 2011-06-04
23:35:38 UTC ---
Created attachment 24433
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24433
Patch to generalize the copy hack in the compiler
Here's the patch I was working with, if you're in
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49107
--- Comment #16 from Jason Merrill 2011-06-04
23:42:03 UTC ---
*** Bug 49266 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49266
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49285
Summary: [4.7 Regression]: build fails on mmix in
libgcc2.c:__powisf2: ICE in emit_unop_insn
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: build, ice-on-valid-co
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49285
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18770
Nathan Froyd changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2288
Nathan Froyd changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
63 matches
Mail list logo
