http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49335
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.6.1 |4.6.2
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49540
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.6.1 |4.6.2
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44415
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.6.1 |4.6.2
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48273
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.6.1 |4.6.2
--- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46639
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.6.1 |4.6.2
--- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49112
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.6.1 |4.6.2
--- Comment #15 from Jakub Jelinek
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49536
--- Comment #6 from Jack Howarth 2011-06-27
13:08:38 UTC ---
Can we get this fix backported to gcc-4_5-branch and gcc-4_6-branch as well?
Dragonegg currently only builds against those FSF gcc releases.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49544
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48949
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.6.1 |4.6.2
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49545
Summary: [4.7 Regression] New C++ test failures
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: middle-end
AssignedTo: unassi
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48173
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.6.1 |4.6.2
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47903
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.6.1 |4.6.2
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49545
--- Comment #2 from Richard Guenther 2011-06-27
13:36:03 UTC ---
An anyway useful transform would be to hoist the call in
iftmp.0_15 = *D.2099_14;
:
# iftmp.0_1 = PHI
iftmp.0_1 (&a);
based on the fact that on the edge 2->4 it will be a
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18501
--- Comment #53 from Manuel López-Ibáñez 2011-06-27
13:06:09 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #52)
> 4.3 branch is being closed, moving to 4.4.7 target.
Richard, I would suggest to remove the regression markers. This is a regression
since 4.0 that i
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40959
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.6.1 |4.6.2
--- Comment #28 from Jakub Jelinek
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48492
--- Comment #10 from Eric Botcazou 2011-06-27
14:34:08 UTC ---
Author: ebotcazou
Date: Mon Jun 27 14:34:05 2011
New Revision: 175533
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=175533
Log:
PR lto/48492
* dwarf2out.c (dwarf2out_
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34772
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48492
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49394
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49394
--- Comment #2 from Richard Guenther 2011-06-27
14:32:04 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Mon Jun 27 14:32:00 2011
New Revision: 175532
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=175532
Log:
2011-06-27 Richard Guenther
PR tree-op
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25343
Mikael Pettersson changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mikpe at it dot uu.se
--- Comment #16
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49547
Summary: LZCNT should be enabled only if ABM or LZCNT bits are
set
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49538
--- Comment #1 from Markus Trippelsdorf
2011-06-27 16:12:04 UTC ---
ld.bfd links libkonsoleprivate.so without errors, gold however fails:
Linking CXX shared library ../../lib/libkonsoleprivate.so
/usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/4.7.0/../../../.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49547
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44241
ging...@gcc.gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38738
--- Comment #7 from Rainer Orth 2011-06-27 16:21:02 UTC
---
Author: ro
Date: Mon Jun 27 16:20:47 2011
New Revision: 175537
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=175537
Log:
gcc:
PR libmudflap/38738
* config/sol2.h [!U
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34772
--- Comment #20 from Davi Arnaut 2011-06-27
16:40:52 UTC ---
Actually, we would really like it. Currently, we have to disable it because
most of the warnings are bogus. New _valid_ warnings are welcome.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40986
--- Comment #5 from Markus.Schoepflin at comsoft dot aero 2011-06-27 15:07:52
UTC ---
Zur Zeit bin ich nicht im Büro. Sie erreichen mich wieder ab dem 11.07.2011.
I am currently not in the office. You can reach me again as of 11.JUL.2011.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18918
--- Comment #63 from Tobias Burnus 2011-06-27
14:05:12 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #62)
I have a draft patch, which still fails to diagnose some issues; and I got
stuck with understanding C1302. Thus, I asked at J3:
http://j3-fortran.org/piperm
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49545
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
int x) {}
};
template
// or: template
struct K {
void f () { T (0); }
};
int main () {
K<&S::m> k;
// or: K k;
k.f ();
}
--
< c> DW_AT_producer: GNU C++ 4.7.0 20110627 (experimental)
<
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49544
Summary: [4.7 Regression] ICE in new_elt_loc_list
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
URL: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/716837
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
Se
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49430
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|ICE with allocatable length |[F03] ICE with allocatable
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38896
Hans-Peter Nilsson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|INVALID |WONTFIX
--- Comment #11 from Hans-Pe
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24526
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49544
--- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-06-27
16:45:54 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Mon Jun 27 16:45:49 2011
New Revision: 175540
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=175540
Log:
PR debug/49544
* cselib.c (promote_debug_lo
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49536
--- Comment #7 from Jack Howarth 2011-06-27
16:46:17 UTC ---
I can confirm that the adjusted backport of...
Index: gcc/tree-vect-stmts.c
===
--- gcc/tree-vect-stmts.c(revision 1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49540
--- Comment #5 from Tobias Burnus 2011-06-27
15:28:31 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> Thus, in some way, the repeat count must come back. One possibility is to
> handle the special case /*/, which is equivalent to a
> scalar
> initialization.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49511
--- Comment #1 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE 2011-06-27 16:43:12 UTC ---
Dave,
> The problem is type invokes the sh-posix shell and it aliases type
> to 'whence -v'.
>
> 599 (hiauly1)dave> /bin/sh
> $ whence -v gnatmake
> gnatmake is /o
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49539
--- Comment #4 from Mikael Pettersson 2011-06-27
16:51:46 UTC ---
4.7-20110618 failed to bootstrap with the same error.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49537
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49511
--- Comment #2 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia.nrc.ca 2011-06-27 17:15:23 UTC ---
> could you please run the exact commands used in the run_acats which
> function and report the results:
>
> type -p gnatmake 2>/dev/null
> echo $?
>
> type gnatmake 2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49546
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49540
--- Comment #7 from Tobias Burnus 2011-06-27
17:22:15 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> (In reply to comment #2)
> > Thus, in some way, the repeat count must come back. One possibility is to
> > handle the special case /*/, which is equivalent t
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49544
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49466
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|una
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49549
Summary: Use of --noinhibit-exec is unportable
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libmudflap
AssignedTo: unassig
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49543
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski 2011-06-27
17:40:01 UTC ---
/* Data - 1 overflows */
Yes that would mean it is undefined code. Try -fwrapv.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49112
--- Comment #16 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-06-27 17:45:29 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #14)
> The "duplicate save" regression is fixed on trunk and 4.6. Remaining problems:
>
> 1) The structure constructor regression in comment #6.
> 2) Th
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49550
Summary: Many libmudflap tests fail on Solaris 11/x86
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libmudflap
AssignedTo:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49550
--- Comment #1 from Rainer Orth 2011-06-27 17:47:20 UTC
---
Created attachment 24608
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24608
Solaris 11/x86 testsuite log (both multilibs) with Sun ld
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48377
--- Comment #47 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-06-27
17:55:40 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Mon Jun 27 17:55:35 2011
New Revision: 175544
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=175544
Log:
Backported from mainline
2011-06-26 Jakub
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49191
--- Comment #14 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-06-27
17:55:40 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Mon Jun 27 17:55:35 2011
New Revision: 175544
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=175544
Log:
Backported from mainline
2011-06-26 Jakub
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34772
--- Comment #21 from Manuel López-Ibáñez 2011-06-27
18:01:40 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #20)
> Actually, we would really like it. Currently, we have to disable it because
> most of the warnings are bogus. New _valid_ warnings are welcome.
If y
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49452
--- Comment #11 from Janis Johnson 2011-06-27
18:05:41 UTC ---
I have confirmed that the -Os failures began with r175063 and that the tests
pass for several revision before that and pass for several after, so it's
unlikely to be an intermittent f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18016
--- Comment #14 from ejb at ql dot org 2011-06-27 18:06:15 UTC ---
Very nice to see this bug fixed. :-)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49191
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49551
Summary: common variables and -fdata-sections cause ICE in C
front-end.
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Comp
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49543
--- Comment #3 from Alexander Carmeli
2011-06-27 18:40:25 UTC ---
Andrew,
You are correct about the standard not defining the result.
Similar behavior was fixed before (see bug 36300
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36300)
I think t
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49552
Summary: missed optimization: test for zero remainder after
division by a constant.
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
Priority:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49479
--- Comment #6 from Thomas Koenig 2011-06-27
19:02:12 UTC ---
A patch suggested by comment #4 fixes the failure.
Regression-testing.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34772
--- Comment #22 from Davi Arnaut 2011-06-27
19:15:45 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #21)
>> Actually, we would really like it. Currently, we have to disable it because
>> most of the warnings are bogus. New _valid_ warnings are welcome.
>
> If you
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49543
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski 2011-06-27
19:25:37 UTC ---
Well C++ is not C, that is Data is a constant expression in C++ but not in C.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42554
Adriaan van Os changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gcc at microbizz dot nl
--- Comment #15
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49543
--- Comment #5 from Alexander Carmeli
2011-06-27 20:15:37 UTC ---
That's a good point. I removed the const and g++ fails as well.
Therefore, the bug is in the C++ compiler too.
Consts can be promoted as well. Why promote the non-const expressio
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49418
--- Comment #10 from Jason Merrill 2011-06-27
20:15:56 UTC ---
Author: jason
Date: Mon Jun 27 20:15:49 2011
New Revision: 175557
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=175557
Log:
PR c++/49418
* call.c (cxx_type_promotes_t
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49440
--- Comment #6 from Jason Merrill 2011-06-27
20:16:08 UTC ---
Author: jason
Date: Mon Jun 27 20:16:02 2011
New Revision: 175558
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=175558
Log:
PR c++/49440
* class.c (set_linkage_accordi
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49528
--- Comment #5 from Jason Merrill 2011-06-27
20:16:21 UTC ---
Author: jason
Date: Mon Jun 27 20:16:14 2011
New Revision: 175559
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=175559
Log:
PR c++/49528
* semantics.c (potential_const
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49418
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49440
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49528
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36435
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35561
--- Comment #10 from davidxl 2011-06-27 20:44:56
UTC ---
Agree. Such optimization should not be done in gimplication, Nor should the
const keyword be looked at. It should be done in middle end where local
aggregate are analyzed:
1) the aggregat
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49551
--- Comment #1 from Doug Kwan 2011-06-27 20:47:59
UTC ---
The variable x in the test case is should not be a common variable but the
DECL_COMMON is set after merging the first and the second declarations. That
ultimately leads to an ICE.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23656
--- Comment #4 from Hans-Peter Nilsson 2011-06-27
20:55:02 UTC ---
Author: hp
Date: Mon Jun 27 20:54:59 2011
New Revision: 175560
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=175560
Log:
PR regression/47836
PR bootstrap/23656
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49247
--- Comment #3 from Hans-Peter Nilsson 2011-06-27
20:55:04 UTC ---
Author: hp
Date: Mon Jun 27 20:54:59 2011
New Revision: 175560
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=175560
Log:
PR regression/47836
PR bootstrap/23656
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48825
--- Comment #8 from Hans-Peter Nilsson 2011-06-27
20:55:04 UTC ---
Author: hp
Date: Mon Jun 27 20:54:59 2011
New Revision: 175560
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=175560
Log:
PR regression/47836
PR bootstrap/23656
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47733
--- Comment #4 from Hans-Peter Nilsson 2011-06-27
20:55:04 UTC ---
Author: hp
Date: Mon Jun 27 20:54:59 2011
New Revision: 175560
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=175560
Log:
PR regression/47836
PR bootstrap/23656
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47836
--- Comment #16 from Hans-Peter Nilsson 2011-06-27
20:55:03 UTC ---
Author: hp
Date: Mon Jun 27 20:54:59 2011
New Revision: 175560
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=175560
Log:
PR regression/47836
PR bootstrap/23656
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49466
--- Comment #9 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-06-27 20:59:16 UTC ---
Author: janus
Date: Mon Jun 27 20:59:12 2011
New Revision: 175563
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=175563
Log:
2011-06-27 Janus Weil
PR fortran/4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23656
--- Comment #5 from Hans-Peter Nilsson 2011-06-27
21:02:58 UTC ---
Author: hp
Date: Mon Jun 27 21:02:53 2011
New Revision: 175564
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=175564
Log:
PR regression/47836
PR bootstrap/23656
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47836
--- Comment #17 from Hans-Peter Nilsson 2011-06-27
21:02:59 UTC ---
Author: hp
Date: Mon Jun 27 21:02:53 2011
New Revision: 175564
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=175564
Log:
PR regression/47836
PR bootstrap/23656
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49247
--- Comment #4 from Hans-Peter Nilsson 2011-06-27
21:03:00 UTC ---
Author: hp
Date: Mon Jun 27 21:02:53 2011
New Revision: 175564
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=175564
Log:
PR regression/47836
PR bootstrap/23656
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48825
--- Comment #9 from Hans-Peter Nilsson 2011-06-27
21:03:01 UTC ---
Author: hp
Date: Mon Jun 27 21:02:53 2011
New Revision: 175564
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=175564
Log:
PR regression/47836
PR bootstrap/23656
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47733
--- Comment #5 from Hans-Peter Nilsson 2011-06-27
21:03:00 UTC ---
Author: hp
Date: Mon Jun 27 21:02:53 2011
New Revision: 175564
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=175564
Log:
PR regression/47836
PR bootstrap/23656
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48637
--- Comment #3 from Richard Earnshaw 2011-06-27
21:09:32 UTC ---
Author: rearnsha
Date: Mon Jun 27 21:09:25 2011
New Revision: 175565
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=175565
Log:
PR target/48637
* arm.c (arm_print_op
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48637
Richard Earnshaw changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49553
Summary: mt19937 number generator is broken on 64bit systems
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: major
Priority: P3
Component: libstdc++
Assigne
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49553
--- Comment #1 from Boris Dolgov 2011-06-27 21:40:09
UTC ---
Created attachment 24610
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=24610
Replace magic numbers to __WORDSIZE and __WORDSIZE-1
The attached patch solves the problem for me.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25343
Andreas Schwab changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46261
--- Comment #14 from Eric Weddington
2011-06-27 21:49:18 UTC ---
>
> Two things to consider:
>
> . Regardless of whether someone votes to remove an option, a segfault
> should always be analyzed. It's easy enough to otherwise just hide
> a
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49553
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49526
--- Comment #2 from Richard Earnshaw 2011-06-27
21:58:26 UTC ---
Confirmed. Also need patterns for the accumulate and subtract variants, plus
rounding variants.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49526
Richard Earnshaw changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47315
Changpeng Fang changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||changpeng.fang at amd dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47315
--- Comment #5 from H.J. Lu 2011-06-27 23:01:16
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> (In reply to comment #2)
> > A patch is posted at
> >
> > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-05/msg01649.html
>
> H.J., Since this bug shows up in gcc 4.6, c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49539
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|unassigned at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49554
Summary: [4.7 Regression] [C++0x] lambda capture causes "cannot
call member function ... without object"
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: rejects-va
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49554
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-06-27
23:26:44 UTC ---
also, if 'b' is initialized like this it works:
Base_iterator b = this->begin();
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48787
--- Comment #27 from Jerry DeLisle 2011-06-27
23:27:23 UTC ---
Status: I have not disappeared. I have a couple of other small projects to get
out of the way. I did find a bit of a conflict in our code. Two snippets that
were canceling each oth
301 - 400 of 412 matches
Mail list logo
