http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61109
Bug ID: 61109
Summary: ICE [4.10 Regression] in fortran/trans-array.c on
dimension 0 arrays
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61095
--- Comment #11 from Kostya Serebryany ---
ignore comment #9, everything seems to work now.
This passes:
make -j 40 -C gcc check-g{cc,++}
RUNTESTFLAGS='--target_board=unix\{-m32,-m64\} tsan.exp'
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61095
--- Comment #12 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
---
(In reply to Kostya Serebryany from comment #10)
> also, just curious: are such fixes supposed to be accompanied with
> regression tests?
You're right of course. I'll send a testsuite patch s
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61109
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.10.0
Summary|ICE [4.10 Regr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61108
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Known to work|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61108
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59584
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61106
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jsm28 at gcc dot gnu.org
Compon
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61082
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61095
--- Comment #13 from rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
---
Author: rsandifo
Date: Thu May 8 08:00:21 2014
New Revision: 210203
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=210203&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
gcc/testsuite/
PR tree-optimization/61095
* gcc.d
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61028
Joost VandeVondele changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot
ethz
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61106
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61081
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||manu at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61078
--- Comment #1 from jgreenhalgh at gcc dot gnu.org ---
I'm happy to take a look at this, but I have no access to an s390 ESA mode
environment, so will struggle to make much progress.
If it is the case that s390 relies on PUSH_ARGS_REVERSED == 0, t
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61034
--- Comment #12 from rguenther at suse dot de ---
On Wed, 7 May 2014, glisse at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61034
>
> --- Comment #11 from Marc Glisse ---
> The committed patch doesn't seem to optimize a
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61106
--- Comment #3 from Matthias Klose ---
this leads to:
if (!opts_set->x_warn_unused_but_set_variable)
handle_generated_option (opts, opts_set,
OPT_Wunused_but_set_variable, NULL, (),
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61106
--- Comment #4 from Manuel López-Ibáñez ---
(In reply to Matthias Klose from comment #3)
> this leads to:
>
> if (!opts_set->x_warn_unused_but_set_variable)
> handle_generated_option (opts, opts_set,
>
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=13981
Manuel López-Ibáñez changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||manu at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61108
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61108
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||congh at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61084
--- Comment #8 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
>>> the gnat.dg/outer_agg_bitfield_constructor.adb problem.
>>
>> In a build tree from 10 days ago, compiling
>> nested_agg_bitfield_constructor.adb took ca. 0:48 s. After the wide-int
>>
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61106
--- Comment #5 from Matthias Klose ---
this works and fixes the issue. running the full testsuite now.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=13981
--- Comment #6 from Paolo Carlini ---
Sure, I'll do that momentarily. Thanks!
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61097
--- Comment #1 from Rainer Orth ---
Author: ro
Date: Thu May 8 12:11:14 2014
New Revision: 210210
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=210210&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
Don't build libgcc-unwind.map with --disable-shared (PR libgcc/61097)
PR lib
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61097
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
URL|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60981
--- Comment #2 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
Could you please provide details on your configuration? AFAICS, the
lto-plugin isn't ever built in a native Darwin configuration.
So please provide info on host OS and the exact configur
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61106
--- Comment #6 from Manuel López-Ibáñez ---
(In reply to Matthias Klose from comment #5)
> this works and fixes the issue. running the full testsuite now.
It would be nice to add this testcase ("-Wall -Wextra -Wno-unused" should not
give -Wunused
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61106
--- Comment #7 from Manuel López-Ibáñez ---
Please take the patch as yours. I don't have time at the moment to do all the
submission+pinging. (And perhaps it could be backported to GCC 4.9 and 4.8. It
is really a regression.)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59472
Paul Scruby changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||paul at scruby dot com
--- Comment #2 from
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59100
--- Comment #5 from Marc Glisse ---
Author: glisse
Date: Thu May 8 13:17:01 2014
New Revision: 210212
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=210212&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2014-05-08 Marc Glisse
PR tree-optimization/59100
gcc/
* tree-ssa
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59100
Marc Glisse changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59472
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Marc Glisse from comment #1)
> Reassigning to libstdc++ because the warnings seem to say the truth.
They do tell the truth.
We use char arrays for good reason (see the comment in src/c++98/glo
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59472
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely ---
That should work for the streambufs, it's not so simple for the standard stream
objects though, as they're user-visible and we declared their (pretend) types
in .
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61110
Bug ID: 61110
Summary: Simplify value_replacement in phiopt
Product: gcc
Version: 4.10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P3
Component: tree-op
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=6
Bug ID: 6
Summary: Infinite recursion between fold_build2_stat_loc and
fold_binary_loc
Product: gcc
Version: 4.10.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-vali
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51501
--- Comment #9 from Jason Merrill ---
Ville, has EWG taken a look at this issue? I'm sorry this didn't come up in
the C++14 context, as it would have made sense to fix this when we were adding
deduced return types.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=6
ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ktkachov at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51501
--- Comment #10 from Ville Voutilainen ---
(In reply to Jason Merrill from comment #9)
> Ville, has EWG taken a look at this issue? I'm sorry this didn't come up in
Not yet. The handling of Extension-status Core Issues was more or less
on hold w
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61112
Bug ID: 61112
Summary: Simple example triggers false-positive
-Wmaybe-uninitialized warning
Product: gcc
Version: 4.9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=6
--- Comment #2 from Richard Earnshaw ---
This is with r210212.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61112
--- Comment #1 from patrick at parcs dot ath.cx ---
$ gcc -O2 -Wall this.c
this.c: In function ‘void foo(int, int, int)’:
this.c:13:10: warning: ‘w’ may be used uninitialized in this function
[-Wmaybe-uninitialized]
p = w;
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61113
Bug ID: 61113
Summary: Mark private methods hidden automatically
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P3
Component: c++
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=6
Richard Earnshaw changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=13981
--- Comment #7 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: paolo
Date: Thu May 8 14:30:56 2014
New Revision: 210217
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=210217&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
/cp
2014-05-08 Paolo Carlini
PR c++/13981
* typeck.c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=13981
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=6
--- Comment #4 from Richard Earnshaw ---
Starts with r210113, ie the wide-int merge. Though that may just expose the
latent problem.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61113
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to jpakkane from comment #0)
> That is, both the private and public methods are exported in the symbol
> table. The latter is wasteful because private methods can only be called
> from within the c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=6
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener ---
I rather suspect a merge error. The following two need to match to not
oscillate:
/* Minimize the number of bits set in C1, i.e. C1 := C1 & ~C2,
unless (C1 & ~C2) | (C2 & C3) for some
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=6
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.10.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61113
--- Comment #2 from jpakkane at gmail dot com ---
In that case it would fail. But you can make it work by doing this (assuming
compilation with -fvisibility=hidden):
class __attribute__ ((visibility("default"))) Thing final {
public:
void public
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60939
--- Comment #5 from David Edelsohn ---
I am not aware of any specific workaround. I assume that if you could avoid the
function pointer, you would. G++ exception handling implementation on AIX is
fragile.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61092
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
cev-cprop addv.c
it generates this code:
foo:
movw0, 0
ret
.sizefoo, .-foo
.ident"GCC: (unknown) 4.10.0 20140508 (experimental)"
which is wrong!
Scalar evolution seems to hide this bug - if -fno-tree-scev-cprop is removed,
it works fine:
.typefoo,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61114
--- Comment #1 from Tejas Belagod ---
Sorry I meant it fixes this on aarch64_be.
FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/no-scevccp-outer-7.c execution test
GCC) 4.10.0 20140508 (experimental)
module m
implicit none
private
type, abstract :: tt
contains
generic :: gen_f => ff
! Notice: eliminating the non_overridable everything works
procedure, pass(this), non_overridable :: ff
end type tt
contains
subroutine ff(this)
class(tt) :
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61112
--- Comment #2 from patrick at parcs dot ath.cx ---
Relevant contents of -fdump-tree-uninit:
[WORKLIST]: Update worklist with phi: w_2 = PHI
[CHECK]: examining phi: w_2 = PHI
[CHECK] Found def edge 1 in w_1 = PHI
[CHECK] Found def edge 1 in w
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59952
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned at g
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58066
--- Comment #6 from wmi at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: wmi
Date: Thu May 8 16:44:52 2014
New Revision: 210222
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=210222&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
gcc/
2014-05-08 Wei Mi
PR target/58066
* config/i386/i386.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59952
--- Comment #14 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to Uroš Bizjak from comment #13)
> Patch:
>
> --cut here--
> Index: config/i386/i386.c
> ===
> --- config/i386/i386.c (revision 210219)
>
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59952
--- Comment #15 from Thiago Macieira ---
(In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #14)
> I think HLE is the part of TSX.
It is and should be removed from the list.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60609
--- Comment #9 from cbaylis at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: cbaylis
Date: Thu May 8 17:06:04 2014
New Revision: 210227
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=210227&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2014-05-08 Charles Baylis
Backport from mainline
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60609
--- Comment #8 from cbaylis at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: cbaylis
Date: Thu May 8 17:06:01 2014
New Revision: 210226
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=210226&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2014-05-08 Charles Baylis
Backport from mainline
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60609
--- Comment #8 from cbaylis at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: cbaylis
Date: Thu May 8 17:06:01 2014
New Revision: 210226
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=210226&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2014-05-08 Charles Baylis
Backport from mainline
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59952
--- Comment #16 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Thiago Macieira from comment #15)
> (In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #14)
> > I think HLE is the part of TSX.
>
> It is and should be removed from the list.
OK.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61101
--- Comment #19 from Maxime Boissonneault ---
Hi again,
I notice in the first line that leads to an error of bits/c++config.h not found
:
/software6/src/gcc-4.8.2-build/./gcc/xgcc -shared-libgcc
-B/software6/src/gcc-4.8.2-build/./gcc -nostdinc++
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57394
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Thu May 8 17:17:06 2014
New Revision: 210228
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=210228&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/57394
* include/bits/ios_base.h (ios_base(const ios_ba
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59952
--- Comment #17 from Jakub Jelinek ---
I'm not sure about that, after all we enable PTA_HLE even for generic.
The point is whether it might be beneficial to emit the HLE prefixes or not, on
CPUs that never have HLE obviously it doesn't make sense,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57394
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59952
--- Comment #18 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #17)
> I'm not sure about that, after all we enable PTA_HLE even for generic.
> The point is whether it might be beneficial to emit the HLE prefixes or not,
> on CPUs tha
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=13868
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61116
Bug ID: 61116
Summary: redundant DWARF with VLAs
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: debug
Assign
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61077
--- Comment #1 from Marek Polacek ---
Author: mpolacek
Date: Thu May 8 17:42:09 2014
New Revision: 210229
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=210229&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c/61077
c-family/
* c-common.c (check_main_parameter_types): W
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60984
--- Comment #18 from David Edelsohn ---
Created attachment 32761
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=32761&action=edit
Pre-processed file that causes ICE
The pre-processed file crashes both 4.9 branch and trunk in
ipa-inline-analy
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61077
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59952
--- Comment #19 from Thiago Macieira ---
The prefix can be emitted for any CPU, you don't need a flag for that. However,
you cannot emit the XTEST instruction unless the CPU has HLE or RTM.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61053
--- Comment #3 from Marek Polacek ---
Author: mpolacek
Date: Thu May 8 18:19:09 2014
New Revision: 210230
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=210230&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR c/61053
c-family/
* c-common.c (min_align_of_type): New functi
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61053
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=13860
--- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Thu May 8 18:30:14 2014
New Revision: 210231
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=210231&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/13860
* include/std/fstream (basic_filebuf): Enforce r
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61117
Bug ID: 61117
Summary: Manual uses term open source but should say free
software
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pri
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=13860
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|SUSPENDED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53293
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
Comp
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61116
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|redundant DWARF with VLAs |redundant DWARF with VLAs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61117
--- Comment #1 from Joshua Gay ---
Index: faq.html
===
--- faq.html(revision 210229)
+++ faq.html(working copy)
@@ -223,7 +223,7 @@
2.4.
I see. So, what restrictio
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59952
--- Comment #20 from Uroš Bizjak ---
(In reply to Thiago Macieira from comment #19)
> The prefix can be emitted for any CPU, you don't need a flag for that.
> However, you cannot emit the XTEST instruction unless the CPU has HLE or RTM.
Please re
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61092
--- Comment #9 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: uros
Date: Thu May 8 19:02:28 2014
New Revision: 210233
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=210233&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/61092
* config/alpha/alpha.c: Include gimple-itera
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32960
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61117
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||documentation
Status|UNCONF
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59952
--- Comment #21 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: uros
Date: Thu May 8 19:13:10 2014
New Revision: 210234
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=210234&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/59952
* config/i386/i386.c (PTA_HASWELL): Remove
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59952
--- Comment #22 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: uros
Date: Thu May 8 19:23:45 2014
New Revision: 210236
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=210236&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/59952
* config/i386/i386.c (PTA_HASWELL): Remove
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61095
rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59952
--- Comment #23 from uros at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: uros
Date: Thu May 8 19:32:34 2014
New Revision: 210237
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=210237&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
PR target/59952
* config/i386/i386.c (ix86_option_override_
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59952
Uroš Bizjak changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||x86
Status|ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61009
--- Comment #9 from Jeffrey A. Law ---
Sorry, personal issue taking an enormous amount of my time right now. I have a
fully tested patch and just need to twiddle the attached test into an
executable testcase for the regression suite.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61009
--- Comment #10 from davidxl ---
(In reply to Jeffrey A. Law from comment #9)
> Sorry, personal issue taking an enormous amount of my time right now. I
> have a fully tested patch and just need to twiddle the attached test into an
> executable te
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55561
Roland Schulz changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||roland at rschulz dot eu
--- Comment #44
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61117
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Thu May 8 19:49:26 2014
New Revision: 210239
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=210239&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2014-05-08 Joshua Gay
PR libstdc++/61117
* doc/xml/faq.xml (faq
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61117
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Thu May 8 19:50:34 2014
New Revision: 210240
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=210240&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2014-05-08 Joshua Gay
PR libstdc++/61117
* doc/xml/faq.xml (faq
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61101
Maxime Boissonneault changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61117
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Thu May 8 19:52:40 2014
New Revision: 210241
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=210241&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2014-05-08 Joshua Gay
PR libstdc++/61117
* doc/xml/faq.xml (faq
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61117
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Thu May 8 19:57:06 2014
New Revision: 210242
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=210242&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2014-05-08 Joshua Gay
PR libstdc++/61117
* doc/xml/faq.xml (faq
1 - 100 of 126 matches
Mail list logo
