This is the mail archive of the
gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: ICE in optimized build of 20000103
- To: ronis at onsager dot chem dot mcgill dot ca
- Subject: Re: ICE in optimized build of 20000103
- From: "Martin v. Loewis" <martin at loewis dot home dot cs dot tu-berlin dot de>
- Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2000 08:49:40 +0100
- CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
- References: <200001050202.VAA12413@montroll.chem.mcgill.ca>
> The extra flags are passed as environment settings for CFLAGS and/or
> CXXFLAGS, set before the configure step, and are thus used whenever
> optimization is allowd (stage1? stage2 etc).
Don't you think you should report relevant settings of environment
variables, too? Especially if nobody is capable of reproducing your
bug report?
> Yes, I get exactly the same problem on an i686 laptop (brand new). In
> addition, I've occasionally seen some other reports of this bug.
How do you know it is the same bug, if you don't even know what the
bug is?
>
> Here are some references to problems with bootstrap builds involving
> _muldi3:
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/1999-10/msg00690.html
Perhaps not the same bug. You get a crash on expr.c:6584, he gets a
crash on expr.c:6502 (unless it is the same code due to a 82-lines
shift of code).
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/1999-12/msg00543.html
Not the same bug, it crashes at reload.c:5846.
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/1999-09/msg00184.html
Definitely not the same bug, as gcc was configured with
--enable-checking, and it occured on haifa-sched.c:3245
> There are lots more. What is puzzling is that you don't get the
> problem at all.
Do you really think that building totally fails for every Linux
system, and nobody does anything about this for four months?
Regards,
Martin