https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98125
--- Comment #19 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:b680b9049737198d010e49cf434704c6a6ed2b3f
commit r11-7968-gb680b9049737198d010e49cf434704c6a6ed2b3f
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date: S
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97653
--- Comment #17 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:cda41ce0e8414aec59e6b9fbe645d96e6e8193e2
commit r11-7969-gcda41ce0e8414aec59e6b9fbe645d96e6e8193e2
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date: S
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99863
--- Comment #18 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:9c7473688e78dc41fd4312a983453df195dd7786
commit r11-7970-g9c7473688e78dc41fd4312a983453df195dd7786
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date: S
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99882
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a40015780f8cc49476741b6914bd5ee97bd10f1d
commit r11-7971-ga40015780f8cc49476741b6914bd5ee97bd10f1d
Author: Jakub Jelinek
Date: Sa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99888
Bug ID: 99888
Summary: Add powerpc ELFv2 support for
-fpatchable-function-entry*
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prior
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99889
Bug ID: 99889
Summary: Add powerpc ELFv1 support for
-fpatchable-function-entry* with "o" sections
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: norm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98125
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99888
Bug 99888 depends on bug 98125, which changed state.
Bug 98125 Summary: [11 Regression] New test case g++.dg/pr93195a.C in r11-5656
has excess errors
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98125
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99889
Bug 99889 depends on bug 98125, which changed state.
Bug 98125 Summary: [11 Regression] New test case g++.dg/pr93195a.C in r11-5656
has excess errors
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98125
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97653
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|REOPENED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99863
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[10/11 Regression] wrong|[10 Regression] wrong code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99882
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99890
Bug ID: 99890
Summary: The -mstrict-aglign doesn't support the ARM targets
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Componen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99890
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|c |target
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99891
Bug ID: 99891
Summary: Can GCC 4.8.1 Support TI c6x taregts?
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99892
Bug ID: 99892
Summary: Does GCC 4.8.1 really support OpenMP?
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libgomp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99893
Bug ID: 99893
Summary: C++20 unexpanded parameter packs falsely not detected
(lambda is involved)
Product: gcc
Version: 10.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: nor
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99894
Bug ID: 99894
Summary: Does GCC 4.8.1 support OpenCL?
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
Assign
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99894
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |INVALID
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99892
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |INVALID
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99895
Bug ID: 99895
Summary: Function parameters generated wrong in call to member
of non-type template parameter in lambda
Product: gcc
Version: 10.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99891
Andreas Schwab changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99818
--- Comment #4 from G. Steinmetz ---
> Have you ever tried to put a tent up in a storm?
... geez, how difficult and lengthy ...
The number of bug reports is admittedly increasing,
but the number of still unknown bugs is decreasing, isn't it?
A
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68081
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |INVALID
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96645
--- Comment #10 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Jason Merrill from comment #8)
> Any opinions on what our behavior should be? Should there be an LWG issue?
Yes, we want an LWG issue. That might then result in a new core issue too, if
we c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99818
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Paul Thomas :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:fc27115d6107f219e6f3dc610c99210005fe9dc5
commit r11-7972-gfc27115d6107f219e6f3dc610c99210005fe9dc5
Author: Paul Thomas
Date: Sat Ap
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99896
Bug ID: 99896
Summary: g++ drops -lc
Product: gcc
Version: 10.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: driver
Assignee: unassig
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90183
--- Comment #3 from Roland Illig ---
In the German translation of GCC I consistently use "available since".
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99891
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
This seems like something you should ask on the mailing list, it's not a bug.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99891
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
And if you're comparing a recent Ti compiler with GCC 4.8.1, I hope you realise
that GCC 4.8.1 is eight years old.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99894
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
This is not a bug report. lease use the gcc-help mailing list for basic
question about GCC, don't report bugs to ask questions.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99896
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Tom de Vries from comment #0)
> With g++, we have instead:
> ...
> collect2 ... main.o foo.o -lpcre2-posix ...
> ...
It isn't dropped, it's moved to the end:
main.o foo.o -lpcre2-posix -lstdc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90183
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-04-03
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99892
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to ZhangMin from comment #0)
> However, in version 4.8.1, only a few processors such as PowerPC support -
> pthread option, and the more commonly used arm and x86 processors do not
> support this
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91217
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[8/9/10/11 Regression] |[8/9/10 Regression]
|R
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99897
Bug ID: 99897
Summary: ICE Segmentation fault when operator appear in
template parameter-list
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93301
Martin Uecker changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||muecker at gwdg dot de
--- Comment #15 f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99898
Bug ID: 99898
Summary: Possible LTO object incompatibility on gcc-10 branch
Product: gcc
Version: 10.2.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compon
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99643
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jason at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99896
--- Comment #2 from Tom de Vries ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #1)
> (In reply to Tom de Vries from comment #0)
> > With g++, we have instead:
> > ...
> > collect2 ... main.o foo.o -lpcre2-posix ...
> > ...
>
> It isn't dropped,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98301
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #49770|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99874
Patrick Palka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93301
--- Comment #16 from Vincent Lefèvre ---
(In reply to Martin Uecker from comment #15)
> I do not think the C standard can be read in a way where reading a variable
> can yield a different value each time (except if the access is UB). For
> unspec
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99898
--- Comment #1 from ohaiziejohwahkeezuoz at xff dot cz ---
I figured object files contain the version of the compiler, so the previous
version was GCC: (GNU) 10.2.1 20201110 (built from releases/gcc-10 at that
date)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93301
--- Comment #17 from Martin Uecker ---
(In reply to Vincent Lefèvre from comment #16)
> (In reply to Martin Uecker from comment #15)
> > I do not think the C standard can be read in a way where reading a variable
> > can yield a different value e
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99899
Bug ID: 99899
Summary: ICE: in do_auto_deduction, at cp/pt.c:29630
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99896
--- Comment #3 from Andreas Schwab ---
regcomp and re_search are always incompatible.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99453
--- Comment #4 from Philippe Blain ---
Patch posted:
- https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-April/567650.html
(gcc-patches)
- https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/libstdc++/2021-April/052291.html (libstdc++)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99900
Bug ID: 99900
Summary: feature request: 16-bit x86 C compiler / support
compilation of (VirtualBox) BIOS
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Sever
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99900
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
--- Comment #1 from Andrew P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99896
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Tom de Vries from comment #2)
> I don't understand. AFAICT, it's dropped. It's not moved to the end,
> because -lc is already at the end without specifying -lc.
OK, it's dropped because it's
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91416
--- Comment #11 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Marek Polacek :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a809d8a737da1ccebcd93065fc57fc0f4d94894a
commit r11-7975-ga809d8a737da1ccebcd93065fc57fc0f4d94894a
Author: Marek Polacek
Date: F
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99896
--- Comment #5 from Andreas Schwab ---
The bug is in gdb because re_search cannot be paired with regcomp.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99901
Bug ID: 99901
Summary: static const class var implemented with constexpr
doesn't emit symbols in C++17 mode
Product: gcc
Version: 11.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Sever
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99897
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
Reso
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93383
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hewillk at gmail dot com
--- Comment #10
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93383
--- Comment #11 from Marek Polacek ---
template struct A {};
template struct S { void foo(S<+a>); };
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99643
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Jason Merrill :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c3d3bb0f03dbd02512ab46979088ee8e22520c24
commit r11-7980-gc3d3bb0f03dbd02512ab46979088ee8e22520c24
Author: Jason Merrill
Date: Sa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99643
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[8/9/10/11 Regression] |[8/9/10 Regression]
|i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99896
Tom de Vries changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||matz at suse dot de
--- Comment #6 from T
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99902
Bug ID: 99902
Summary: Deduced return type of lambda in default template
argument takes return type from variable template
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99890
--- Comment #2 from ZhangMin ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> Because it is a target specific option.
> What exactly are you trying to do?
>
> most instructions in ARMv7+ support unaligned data.
Although armv7 + supports non al
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99890
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99898
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski ---
This is not the first time versioning of LTO objects have come up with respect
to the bug fix releases.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99903
Bug ID: 99903
Summary: 32-bit x86 frontends randomly crash while reporting
timing on Windows
Product: gcc
Version: 10.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
65 matches
Mail list logo
