--- Comment #7 from overholt at redhat dot com 2005-11-08 19:31 ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> I agree, this looks like PR 23182.
> Andrew (Overholt) -- does this bug still occur for you?
No. Sorry, I should have closed this when I first realized that it was no
longer occ
--- Comment #3 from overholt at redhat dot com 2005-11-24 15:21 ---
This test case does not work for me when I have not applied the patch. After
application and building, it does appear to run "forever" :)
Also, the Eclipse issue that spurred this on (referenced in comm
--- Comment #3 from overholt at redhat dot com 2005-12-12 15:07 ---
I am experiencing this now as well.
--
overholt at redhat dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from overholt at redhat dot com 2005-12-12 16:09 ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> I am experiencing this now as well.
I should mention that I'm seeing this on x86_64 but not on i386.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24441
--- Comment #3 from overholt at redhat dot com 2006-01-17 01:38 ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> Andrew, is this still happening with 4.1?
No. Sorry I didn't close this already.
I successfully built Eclipse (natively-compiled) on ia64 last week.
Marking WORKSFORME.
--
ove
Summary: gij fails on ppc and not on x86
Product: gcc
Version: 4.0.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: java
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: overho
--- Additional Comments From overholt at redhat dot com 2005-02-20 15:11
---
Created an attachment (id=8239)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8239&action=view)
output of strace gij org.eclipse.jdt.internal.compiler.batch.Main
HelloWorld.java
Stripped-down
iority: P2
Component: java
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: overholt at redhat dot com
CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org,java-prs at gcc dot gnu
dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20116
--- Additional Comments From overholt at redhat dot com 2005-02-22 15:09
---
(In reply to comment #3)
> 1. Why was aload_3 generated? Which compiler genrated it?
> overholt, please let me know how this jar file was generated.
This jar file was generated by ecj.
--
--- Additional Comments From overholt at redhat dot com 2005-02-22 15:25
---
(In reply to comment #5)
> Ok, so the file was generated by ecj, but was ecj precompiled or interpreted?
>
ecj was running interpreted at the time
> What VM was ecj running on?
gij
> Does
--- Additional Comments From overholt at redhat dot com 2005-02-23 16:38
---
After further investigation, I have determined that this is not a bug with the
dbtool. Closing.
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From overholt at redhat dot com 2005-02-24 20:40
---
This is fixed for me as of 20050223. Changing to FIXED.
--
What|Removed |Added
: gcc
Version: 4.0.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: java
AssignedTo: aph at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: overholt at redhat dot com
CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org,java-prs at gcc do
constructs
Product: gcc
Version: 4.0.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: libgcj
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: overholt at redhat dot com
--- Additional Comments From overholt at redhat dot com 2005-03-16 21:50
---
Created an attachment (id=8406)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8406&action=view)
Patch for quoting constructs (from Ziga's CP bug)
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20504
--- Additional Comments From overholt at redhat dot com 2005-03-16 21:51
---
Created an attachment (id=8407)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8407&action=view)
Mauve test cases for java.util.regex (from Ziga's CP bug)
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: java
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: overholt at redhat dot com
CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org,java-prs at gcc dot gnu
dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugz
--- Additional Comments From overholt at redhat dot com 2005-03-23 18:25
---
Created an attachment (id=8435)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8435&action=view)
Test case
Toggling the comment on line 17 affects things.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_
ts reserved.
--
Summary: Bytecode -> native code doesn't handle exception
properly
Product: gcc
Version: 4.0.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: java
AssignedTo: unass
--- Additional Comments From overholt at redhat dot com 2005-04-05 18:12
---
Created an attachment (id=8537)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8537&action=view)
Test case (boiled down from something we're seeing with Ecilpse)
--
http://gcc.gnu.
--
What|Removed |Added
CC||bkonrath at redhat dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20768
--- Additional Comments From overholt at redhat dot com 2005-08-24 14:45
---
(In reply to comment #11)
> I'm surprised this still fails with 4.0.1-6.
>
> overholt, can you reproduce this?
I am having other issues building Eclipse ATM but I have not seen this, no. If
it&
ReportedBy: overholt at redhat dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26138
ority: P3
Component: java
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: overholt at redhat dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27028
--- Additional Comments From overholt at redhat dot com 2005-04-26 14:54
---
I've verified this fix in the RPMs in Fedora rawhide (4.0.0-1). I'm not sure if
this counts as a verification from gcc's standpoint, though. I'll mark as FIXED
but feel free to change if
mmary: FileChannel.tryLock() return value incorrect
Product: gcc
Version: 4.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: libgcj
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: overholt at redhat do
--- Additional Comments From overholt at redhat dot com 2005-05-03 21:24
---
Created an attachment (id=8810)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8810&action=view)
test case part 1
Run this part first.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21372
--- Additional Comments From overholt at redhat dot com 2005-05-03 21:28
---
Created an attachment (id=8811)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8811&action=view)
test case part 1
Run this file and leave it running while you try to run the second attachment
(fort
--- Additional Comments From overholt at redhat dot com 2005-05-03 21:29
---
Created an attachment (id=8812)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8812&action=view)
second part to the test case
Run this while TestLocking2 is running.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/b
--- Additional Comments From overholt at redhat dot com 2005-05-03 21:44
---
Created an attachment (id=8813)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8813&action=view)
patch
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21372
--- Additional Comments From overholt at redhat dot com 2005-05-04 14:28
---
Any news here?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20504
Product: gcc
Version: 4.0.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: java
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: overholt at redhat dot com
CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org,java
--- Additional Comments From overholt at redhat dot com 2005-05-11 18:43
---
Created an attachment (id=8864)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8864&action=view)
EditorActionBars bytecode (1 of 3)
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21517
--- Additional Comments From overholt at redhat dot com 2005-05-11 18:44
---
Created an attachment (id=8865)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8865&action=view)
EditorActionBars bytecode (2 of 3)
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21517
--- Additional Comments From overholt at redhat dot com 2005-05-11 18:44
---
Created an attachment (id=8866)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8866&action=view)
EditorActionBars bytecode (3 of 3)
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21517
--- Additional Comments From overholt at redhat dot com 2005-05-11 18:45
---
I tried compiling the bytecode with Sun's javac (as opposed to ecj) and the
results are the same.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21517
--
What|Removed |Added
CC||bkonrath at redhat dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21517
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: java
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: overholt at redhat dot com
CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org,java-prs at gcc dot gnu
dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/b
: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P2
Component: libgcj
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: overholt at redhat dot com
CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org,java-prs at gcc dot gnu
--- Additional Comments From overholt at redhat dot com 2005-01-05 21:49
---
Using Jakub's gcc4 RPMs from Fedora rawhide (on Fedora Core 3), I'm getting:
gcj4 -O2 -fPIC -fjni -findirect-dispatch -shared -o jsch-0.1.17.so \
jsch-0.1.17.jar
com/jcraft/jsch/ChannelSftp.java:
uced for bitwise AND
Product: gcc
Version: 4.0.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: java
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: overholt at redhat dot com
--- Additional Comments From overholt at redhat dot com 2005-01-06 19:15
---
Created an attachment (id=7884)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=7884&action=view)
test case
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19295
ty: enhancement
Priority: P2
Component: libgcj
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: overholt at redhat dot com
CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org,java-prs at gcc dot gnu
dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19301
duct: gcc
Version: 4.0.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: java
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: overholt at redhat dot com
CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot
--- Additional Comments From overholt at redhat dot com 2005-01-18 14:50
---
Original bug verified fixed. New PR filed as requested: PR19505.
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From overholt at redhat dot com 2005-02-10 23:46
---
Verified.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|VERIFIED
--- Additional Comments From overholt at redhat dot com 2004-12-10 19:43
---
Yes, this is i686-linux. I'll update to a more recent snapshot and see if I can
reproduce.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18931
47 matches
Mail list logo
