This is the mail archive of the
gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
[Bug c++/11720] New: mozilla configure script thinks 3.3.1 has pedantic long long bug
- From: "calum dot mackay at sun dot com" <gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- To: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: 30 Jul 2003 01:03:02 -0000
- Subject: [Bug c++/11720] New: mozilla configure script thinks 3.3.1 has pedantic long long bug
- Reply-to: gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org
PLEASE REPLY TO gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org ONLY, *NOT* gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11720
Summary: mozilla configure script thinks 3.3.1 has pedantic long
long bug
Product: gcc
Version: 3.3.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: c++
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: calum dot mackay at sun dot com
CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
Whilst configuring the mozilla appsuite with 3.3.1, the following error occurs:
checking whether C++ compiler has -pedantic long long bug... yes
configure: error: Your compiler appears to have a known bug where long long is m
iscompiled when using -pedantic. Reconfigure using --disable-pedantic.
I can reproduce the test:
diz $ cat conftest.C
int main () {
if (sizeof(long long) != 8) { return 1; }
return 0;
}
diz $ c++ -pedantic conftest.C
conftest.C: In function `int main()':
conftest.C:2: error: ISO C++ does not support `long long'
Is mozilla using a valid test?
I'm using the Debian unstable packages:
diz $ c++ -v
Reading specs from /usr/lib/gcc-lib/i386-linux/3.3.1/specs
Configured with: ../src/configure -v
--enable-languages=c,c++,java,f77,pascal,objc,ada,treelang --prefix=/usr
--mandir=/usr/share/man --infodir=/usr/share/info
--with-gxx-include-dir=/usr/include/c++/3.3 --enable-shared --with-system-zlib
--enable-nls --without-included-gettext --enable-__cxa_atexit
--enable-clocale=gnu --enable-debug --enable-java-gc=boehm
--enable-java-awt=xlib --enable-objc-gc i386-linux
Thread model: posix
gcc version 3.3.1 20030728 (Debian prerelease)
Is this possibly related to bug 11459?