gcc archive
author index for June, 2005

This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.

Indexes:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Site Nav:	[Browse other archives for this mailing list] [Browse other mailing lists at this site]
Search: Limit to: This time period only This mailing list only All mailing lists Entire site (no limit)

唐 垠

• 2005-06-22 07:01 meet problem when building uCOSII with gcc-h8s ported version

"Martin v. Löwis"

• 2005-06-15 19:28 Re: po file update

Björn Haase

• 2005-06-04 12:27 RFC: Strategy for cc0 -> CCmode conversion for the AVR target.
• 2005-06-04 14:20 Re: RFC: Strategy for cc0 -> CCmode conversion for the AVR target.
• 2005-06-04 22:29 Re: sizeof(int) in testsuite
• 2005-06-15 20:07 Re: help using mingw/gcc

François-Xavier Coudert

• 2005-06-20 16:57 Re: Cygwin build failure
• 2005-06-29 21:51 Add clog10 to builtins.def, round 2

Rafael Espíndola

• 2005-06-14 15:47 copyright assignment
• 2005-06-15 16:12 copyright assignment
• 2005-06-16 13:50 Re: The tree API
• 2005-06-22 17:52 Re: add sourcefiles to gcc
• 2005-06-23 12:43 Re: add sourcefiles to gcc

René Rebe

• 2005-06-06 07:16 Re: Tracking down gcc-4.0 performance regressions
• 2005-06-08 09:03 Re: Howto biarch compiler default to -m32?
• 2005-06-12 19:26 Re: A Suggestion for Release Testing

Mirza Hadzic

• 2005-06-06 21:36 Re: Will Apple still support GCC development?

"Martin v. LÃwis"

• 2005-06-18 21:27 Forward: gcc-4.0.1-b20050607.de.po [REJECTED]

Pedro LamarÃo

• 2005-06-21 13:28 An Rvalue references for g++ patch

BjÃrn Haase

• 2005-06-05 08:44 Re: RFC: Strategy for cc0 -> CCmode conversion for the AVR target.
• 2005-06-16 08:05 Re: Expanding an ADDSI3 into 2 x ADDHI3 does not work

Renà Rebe

• 2005-06-08 07:57 Howto biarch compiler default to -m32?

Aalokrai Porwal

• 2005-06-29 23:43 Re:

Aaron W. LaFramboise

• 2005-06-15 17:44 Re: Fixing Bugs (Was: A Suggestion for Release Testing)

Adrian Straetling

• 2005-06-10 11:29 Re: Fw: Can't bootstrap mainline on powerpc64-linux

Alan Lehotsky

• 2005-06-06 20:03 Re: Will Apple still support GCC development?

Alan Modra

• 2005-06-01 05:59 Re: What is wrong with Bugzilla? [Was: Re: GCC and Floating-Point]

Andi Kleen

• 2005-06-15 01:29 Re: Visual C++ style inline asms
• 2005-06-29 11:04 Re: GCC-4.1.0 size optimization bug for MIPS architecture...

Andreas Jaeger

• 2005-06-08 08:51 Re: Howto biarch compiler default to -m32?

Andreas Schwab

• 2005-06-01 08:42 Re: What is wrong with Bugzilla? [Was: Re: GCC and Floating-Point]
• 2005-06-07 09:59 Re: Subversion migration plans
• 2005-06-08 09:16 Re: Andreas Schwab m68k Maintainer
• 2005-06-24 13:57 Re: Suggestion for simple feature - "beep" on finish.
• 2005-06-27 15:24 Re: expanding builtins
• 2005-06-28 21:39 Re: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC)

Andrew Haley

• 2005-06-14 09:22 Re: x86 Q: why aren't the SSE intrinsics always_inline?
• 2005-06-20 14:04 Re: How to replace -O1 with corresponding -f's?
• 2005-06-28 15:04 Re: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC)

Andrew Pinski

• 2005-06-03 07:30 Ada front-end depends on signed overflow
• 2005-06-03 15:21 Re: Ada front-end depends on signed overflow
• 2005-06-03 15:43 Re: Ada front-end depends on signed overflow
• 2005-06-05 17:47 Re: GCC 4.0.1 Status (2005-06-05)
• 2005-06-05 18:05 Re: GCC 4.0.1 Status (2005-06-05)
• 2005-06-08 17:10 Re: GCC 4.01 RC1 Available
• 2005-06-08 18:05 Re: GCC 4.01 RC1 Available
• 2005-06-09 20:17 Re: GCC 4.01 RC1 Available
• 2005-06-12 23:17 Re: Typo in man page (atanh)
• 2005-06-13 14:23 Re: strange double comparison results with -O[12] on x86(-32)
• 2005-06-14 02:49 Re: A Suggestion for Release Testing
• 2005-06-14 14:27 Re: Fixing Bugs (Was: A Suggestion for Release Testing)
• 2005-06-14 14:34 Re: Fixing Bugs (Was: A Suggestion for Release Testing)
• 2005-06-14 14:34 Re: Fixing Bugs (Was: A Suggestion for Release Testing)
• 2005-06-14 14:39 Re: Fixing Bugs (Was: A Suggestion for Release Testing)
• 2005-06-15 01:26 Re: Visual C++ style inline asms
• 2005-06-15 02:58 Re: Fixing Bugs (Was: A Suggestion for Release Testing)
• 2005-06-15 18:30 Re: 4.0.0->4.0.1 regression: Can't use 64-bit shared libs on powerpc-apple-darwin8.1.0
• 2005-06-15 22:18 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-16 14:24 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-16 15:16 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-16 16:34 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-16 16:39 Re: build fails for 1st pass gcc 3.4.4 target=m68k-elf host=build=x86_64
• 2005-06-16 17:38 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-16 17:41 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-18 00:23 Re: basic VRP min/max range overflow question
• 2005-06-18 21:30 Re: Forward: gcc-4.0.1-b20050607.de.po [REJECTED]
• 2005-06-19 13:57 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-19 15:50 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-20 14:26 Re: How to replace -O1 with corresponding -f's?
• 2005-06-20 14:35 Re: How to replace -O1 with corresponding -f's?
• 2005-06-20 15:01 Re: How to replace -O1 with corresponding -f's?
• 2005-06-20 15:36 Re: How to replace -O1 with corresponding -f's?
• 2005-06-20 16:00 Re: Someone introduced a libiberty crashing bug in the past week
• 2005-06-20 16:04 Re: Someone introduced a libiberty crashing bug in the past week
• 2005-06-21 16:14 Re: -floop-optimize2
• 2005-06-21 17:48 Re: Problem implementing faults in Objective-C
• 2005-06-22 03:57 Re: [4.0.0] "make check-g++" fails linking tests on powerpc-apple-darwin7.9.0
• 2005-06-22 18:14 Re: gcc template error?
• 2005-06-22 19:56 Re: cpp, CPLUS_INCLUDE_PATH, and g++: bug or feature?
• 2005-06-22 22:04 Re: spec benchmark testing
• 2005-06-23 14:45 Re: GCC 4.0.1 Status
• 2005-06-23 15:48 Re: does friend qualify as a forward decl?
• 2005-06-24 22:17 Re: [RFH] - Less than optimal code compiling 252.eon -O2 for x86
• 2005-06-26 22:09 Re: attributes and templates
• 2005-06-26 22:11 Re: [Ada] Current patch needed to build Ada as of 20050626
• 2005-06-28 04:08 signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC)
• 2005-06-28 04:50 Re: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC)
• 2005-06-28 05:34 Re: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC)
• 2005-06-28 13:52 Re: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC)
• 2005-06-28 14:05 Re: Do C++ signed types have modulo semantics?
• 2005-06-28 16:07 Re: Do C++ signed types have modulo semantics?
• 2005-06-28 18:42 Re: Bootstrap failure -- verify_ssa failed
• 2005-06-28 19:13 Re: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC)
• 2005-06-30 02:17 Re: Question on tree-ssa-loop-ivopts.c:constant_multiple_of
• 2005-06-30 03:24 Ada is broken in a clean directory
• 2005-06-30 16:08 Re: [RFH] - Less than optimal code compiling 252.eon -O2 for x86

Andrey Belevantsev

• 2005-06-30 14:19 Re: Scheduler questions (related to PR17808)

Arnaud Charlet

• 2005-06-03 17:01 Re: Ada front-end depends on signed overflow

Arthur Nascimento

• 2005-06-10 00:57 Re: A Suggestion for Release Testing

Atul Talesara

• 2005-06-07 06:04 Gcc 3.0 and unnamed struct: incorrect offsets

Ayal Zaks

• 2005-06-15 13:03 Re: Software pipelining capabilities

Ben Elliston

• 2005-06-24 13:51 removing src/{expect,dejagnu}
• 2005-06-29 01:27 stage 2 date?

Benjamin Kosnik

• 2005-06-15 01:25 Re: Libstdc++ versioning issues
• 2005-06-16 00:16 Re: GCC 4.0.1 Status (2005-06-13)
• 2005-06-18 18:13 Re: GCC 4.0.1 RC2
• 2005-06-20 07:07 Re: GCC 4.0.1 RC2
• 2005-06-20 16:09 Re: GCC 4.0.1 RC2

Bernardo Innocenti

• 2005-06-07 08:28 Subversion migration plans
• 2005-06-07 21:08 Re: Subversion migration plans
• 2005-06-08 01:01 Re: Andreas Schwab m68k Maintainer
• 2005-06-10 01:23 Re: Getting started with contributing

Bernd Schmidt

• 2005-06-08 16:12 Re: Ada front-end depends on signed overflow
• 2005-06-30 18:12 Re: [RFH] - Less than optimal code compiling 252.eon -O2 for x86

Bill

• 2005-06-19 22:49 libstdc++-libc6.1-1.so.2 libraries

Bobby McNulty

• 2005-06-15 02:39 RE: Visual C++ style inline asms

Bradley Lucier

• 2005-06-03 19:26 Re: Is it possible to catch overflow in long long multiply ?
• 2005-06-15 18:20 4.0.0->4.0.1 regression: Can't use 64-bit shared libs on powerpc-apple-darwin8.1.0
• 2005-06-15 18:41 Re: 4.0.0->4.0.1 regression: Can't use 64-bit shared libs on powerpc-apple-darwin8.1.0
• 2005-06-16 01:37 Re: 4.0.0->4.0.1 regression: Can't use 64-bit shared libs on powerpc-apple-darwin8.1.0
• 2005-06-16 17:05 Re: 4.0.0->4.0.1 regression: Can't use 64-bit shared libs on powerpc-apple-darwin8.1.0
• 2005-06-17 00:14 Re: 4.0.0->4.0.1 regression: Can't use 64-bit shared libs on powerpc-apple-darwin8.1.0
• 2005-06-20 21:42 Re: 4.0.0->4.0.1 regression: Can't use 64-bit shared libs on powerpc-apple-darwin8.1.0

Brett Porter

• 2005-06-10 22:04 Re: rationale for bss patterns in default_section_type_flags ?
• 2005-06-11 00:03 Re: rationale for bss patterns in default_section_type_flags ?
• 2005-06-11 01:04 Re: rationale for bss patterns in default_section_type_flags ?
• 2005-06-13 19:00 Re: rationale for bss patterns in default_section_type_flags ?

Bruno Haible

• 2005-06-06 10:27 recommend use of gperf version 3
• 2005-06-06 13:04 Re: recommend use of gperf version 3

Bryce McKinlay

• 2005-06-03 22:17 Re: Java bootstrap fails compiling libjava
• 2005-06-29 18:48 Re:

Camm Maguire

• 2005-06-03 15:38 Re: [Fwd: Uninitialized stack gaps and conservative garbage collection]

Canqun Yang

• 2005-06-01 14:28 Re: SMS in gcc4.0
• 2005-06-02 01:13 Re: SMS in gcc4.0
• 2005-06-02 01:25 Re: SMS in gcc4.0

chris jefferson

• 2005-06-09 23:03 Re: Getting started with contributing
• 2005-06-14 18:27 Re: Fixing Bugs (Was: A Suggestion for Release Testing)

Christian Bodenstedt

• 2005-06-13 14:20 strange double comparison results with -O[12] on x86(-32)

Christian Joensson

• 2005-06-02 12:15 Can't bootstrap current gcc cvs trunk on sparc-linux: SIGSEGV: build/genattrtab /usr/local/src/trunk/gcc/gcc/config/sparc/sparc.md > tmp-attrtab.c
• 2005-06-02 12:39 Re: Can't bootstrap current gcc cvs trunk on sparc-linux: SIGSEGV: build/genattrtab /usr/local/src/trunk/gcc/gcc/config/sparc/sparc.md > tmp-attrtab.c
• 2005-06-03 10:22 Re: Can't bootstrap current gcc cvs trunk on sparc-linux: SIGSEGV: build/genattrtab /usr/local/src/trunk/gcc/gcc/config/sparc/sparc.md > tmp-attrtab.c
• 2005-06-04 07:34 Re: Can't bootstrap current gcc cvs trunk on sparc-linux: SIGSEGV: build/genattrtab /usr/local/src/trunk/gcc/gcc/config/sparc/sparc.md > tmp-attrtab.c
• 2005-06-07 05:27 Failures in tests for obj-c++....
• 2005-06-09 20:34 obj-c++ on sparc-linux: objc runtime: cannot find class Derived etc...
• 2005-06-13 06:59 In current gcc trunk: warning: dereferencing type-punned pointer will break strict-aliasing rules
• 2005-06-20 05:22 gcc 4.0.1 (prerelease): new libstdc++ testsuite failures on sparc-linux

Dale Johannesen

• 2005-06-09 03:28 Re: Will Apple still support GCC development?
• 2005-06-09 22:49 Re: Can't bootstrap mainline on powerpc64-linux
• 2005-06-18 01:10 Re: basic VRP min/max range overflow question
• 2005-06-29 23:30 Re: Scheduler questions (related to PR17808)

Dan Allen

• 2005-06-01 03:02 Successful bootstrap of GCC 4.0 on Mac OS X 10.4.1
• 2005-06-01 03:11 Mac OS X Panther to Tiger Build Changes for GCC 3.3 and 3.4

Dan Kegel

• 2005-06-15 16:28 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-16 14:39 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-27 15:05 re: [RFC] gcov tool, comparing coverage across platforms

Daniel Berlin

• 2005-06-01 18:01 Re: What is wrong with Bugzilla? [Was: Re: GCC and Floating-Point]
• 2005-06-02 17:07 Re: Edges, predictions, and GC crashes ...
• 2005-06-03 17:05 Re: Ada front-end depends on signed overflow
• 2005-06-06 20:14 Re: gccbug submissions seem to be silently ignored
• 2005-06-09 21:31 Re: Fw: Can't bootstrap mainline on powerpc64-linux
• 2005-06-12 13:33 Re: Big differences on SpecFP results for gcc and icc
• 2005-06-15 00:00 Bug in transparent union handling?
• 2005-06-16 11:43 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustratingreporters
• 2005-06-16 12:07 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-16 12:12 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustratingreporters
• 2005-06-16 12:20 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustratingreporters
• 2005-06-16 12:42 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustratingreporters
• 2005-06-16 14:54 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain infrustrating reporters
• 2005-06-16 15:02 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustratingreporters
• 2005-06-16 15:03 Re: Fixing Bugs (Was: A Suggestion for Release Testing)
• 2005-06-16 15:08 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gainin frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-17 13:54 Re: Major regression in 4.1.
• 2005-06-19 13:35 Re: Bugzilla queries extremely slow
• 2005-06-20 15:43 Someone introduced a libiberty crashing bug in the past week
• 2005-06-20 16:52 Re: Someone introduced a libiberty crashing bug in the past week
• 2005-06-23 23:46 Re: -fprofile-arcs changes the structure of basic blocks
• 2005-06-28 13:27 Re: toplevel bootstrap (stage 2 project)
• 2005-06-28 17:08 Re: Do C++ signed types have modulo semantics?
• 2005-06-29 12:51 Re: GCC-4.1.0 size optimization bug for MIPS architecture...
• 2005-06-29 12:55 Re: Do CO++ signed types have modulo semantics?
• 2005-06-29 18:01 Re: Do C++ signed types have modulo semantics?
• 2005-06-29 22:57 PARM_DECL of DECL_SIZE 0, but TYPE_SIZE of 96 bits
• 2005-06-30 01:17 Re: PARM_DECL of DECL_SIZE 0, but TYPE_SIZE of 96 bits
• 2005-06-30 01:19 Re: Pro64-based GPLed compiler
• 2005-06-30 19:02 Re: PARM_DECL of DECL_SIZE 0, but TYPE_SIZE of 96 bits
• 2005-06-30 22:30 Re: Pro64-based GPLed compiler

Daniel Jacobowitz

• 2005-06-05 16:19 Re: Killing fixproto (possible target obsoletion)
• 2005-06-05 17:54 Re: Proposed obsoletions
• 2005-06-08 22:59 Re: Tracking down source of libgcc_s.so compatibility?
• 2005-06-09 13:21 Re: Tracking down source of libgcc_s.so compatibility?
• 2005-06-09 15:34 Re: Use of check_vect() in vectorizer testsuite
• 2005-06-13 20:03 Re: PATCH: Explicitly pass --64 to assembler on AMD64 targets
• 2005-06-14 14:55 Re: x86 Q: why aren't the SSE intrinsics always_inline?
• 2005-06-14 15:16 Re: PATCH: Explicitly pass --64 to assembler on AMD64 targets
• 2005-06-15 01:17 Re: [Gdb-discuss] Re: x86 Q: why aren't the SSE intrinsics always_inline?
• 2005-06-15 01:29 Re: Visual C++ style inline asms
• 2005-06-29 13:15 Re: named address spaces (update)
• 2005-06-29 17:39 Re: Statement expression with function-call variable lifetime

Daniel Kegel

• 2005-06-06 07:02 Tracking down gcc-4.0 performance regressions
• 2005-06-07 00:00 Will Apple still support signed overflow?
• 2005-06-08 22:57 Tracking down source of libgcc_s.so compatibility?
• 2005-06-09 00:06 Re: Tracking down source of libgcc_s.so compatibility?
• 2005-06-09 20:53 re: A Suggestion for Release Testing
• 2005-06-13 17:53 Re: GCC 4.0.1 Status (2005-06-13)
• 2005-06-13 18:21 Re: Tracking down source of libgcc_s.so compatibility?
• 2005-06-15 05:41 Re: GCC 4.0.1 Status (2005-06-13)
• 2005-06-19 23:47 Getting to the gcc summit

dank

• 2005-06-22 15:52 Blogging the gcc summit

darmay at mindspring dot com

• 2005-06-15 16:31 help using mingw/gcc

Dave Korn

• 2005-06-02 13:19 RE: GCC 3.3.1 -O2 problem with sqrt.c
• 2005-06-08 13:42 RE: Ada front-end depends on signed overflow
• 2005-06-08 13:50 RE: Ada front-end depends on signed overflow
• 2005-06-08 15:36 RE: Ada front-end depends on signed overflow
• 2005-06-13 17:08 RE: strange double comparison results with -O[12] on x86(-32)
• 2005-06-14 17:38 RE: strange double comparison results with -O[12] on x86(-32)
• 2005-06-15 16:13 RE: Fixing Bugs (Was: A Suggestion for Release Testing)
• 2005-06-15 17:06 RE: help using mingw/gcc
• 2005-06-15 18:42 RE: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-22 15:55 RE: Getting the byte offset of a member variable pointer type
• 2005-06-24 10:16 RE: Cross compiler
• 2005-06-28 14:39 RE: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC)
• 2005-06-28 17:10 RE: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC)
• 2005-06-28 17:16 RE: LCOV
• 2005-06-28 17:36 RE: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC)
• 2005-06-28 18:36 RE: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC)
• 2005-06-28 18:38 RE: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC)
• 2005-06-29 13:12 RE: The utility of standard's semantics for overflow

David Ayers

• 2005-06-07 11:21 Re: Failures in tests for obj-c++....
• 2005-06-07 11:35 Re: Failures in tests for obj-c++....

David Bremner

• 2005-06-19 23:59 Re: c/c++ validator

David Edelsohn

• 2005-06-12 19:36 Re: Big differences on SpecFP results for gcc and icc
• 2005-06-13 13:34 Re: Software pipelining capabilities
• 2005-06-18 22:06 Re: GCC 4.0.1 RC2
• 2005-06-28 18:40 Re: Bootstrap failure -- verify_ssa failed

Devang Patel

• 2005-06-05 17:41 Re: GCC 4.0.1 Status (2005-06-05)
• 2005-06-09 15:07 Re: Use of check_vect() in vectorizer testsuite
• 2005-06-09 15:29 Re: Use of check_vect() in vectorizer testsuite
• 2005-06-13 21:24 Re: Use of check_vect() in vectorizer testsuite
• 2005-06-14 18:14 Re: A Suggestion for Release Testing

Dickson Patton

• 2005-06-27 17:41 LCOV

Diego Novillo

• 2005-06-06 00:30 Re: GCC 4.0.1 Status (2005-06-05)
• 2005-06-07 00:36 Re: Value range propagation pass in 4.0.1 RC1 (or not)
• 2005-06-07 11:39 Re: Value range propagation pass in 4.0.1 RC1 (or not)
• 2005-06-13 16:27 Re: Big differences on SpecFP results for gcc and icc
• 2005-06-13 22:36 [gomp] New branch for OpenMP: gomp-20050608-branch
• 2005-06-14 15:00 Re: Fixing Bugs (Was: A Suggestion for Release Testing)
• 2005-06-14 16:19 Re: Fixing Bugs (Was: A Suggestion for Release Testing)
• 2005-06-17 12:28 Re: basic VRP min/max range overflow question
• 2005-06-17 22:48 Re: basic VRP min/max range overflow question
• 2005-06-28 14:23 Re: Some basic/beginner questions
• 2005-06-28 17:35 Re: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC)
• 2005-06-28 18:52 Re: Bootstrap failure -- verify_ssa failed
• 2005-06-29 01:21 Re: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC)

digitize at ricehuskash dot com

• 2005-06-09 09:37 Digitize your Records
• 2005-06-09 09:44 Digitize your Records

DJ Delorie

• 2005-06-03 01:49 sizeof(int) in testsuite
• 2005-06-03 17:43 Re: sizeof(int) in testsuite
• 2005-06-09 20:57 Re: Getting started with contributing
• 2005-06-10 01:13 position of section() attribute question
• 2005-06-10 02:11 Re: position of section() attribute question
• 2005-06-10 02:27 Re: position of section() attribute question
• 2005-06-10 14:04 Re: Question about new warning system
• 2005-06-10 14:16 Re: Question about new warning system
• 2005-06-10 14:26 Re: Question about new warning system
• 2005-06-10 14:51 Re: position of section() attribute question
• 2005-06-10 14:53 Re: Question about new warning system
• 2005-06-10 14:58 Re: Question about new warning system
• 2005-06-10 17:11 Re: Question about new warning system
• 2005-06-11 01:09 Re: Question about new warning system
• 2005-06-20 18:10 Re: basic VRP min/max range overflow question
• 2005-06-21 22:24 Re: Error building 4.0.1-RC2
• 2005-06-21 22:46 Re: Error building 4.0.1-RC2
• 2005-06-29 12:18 Re: named address spaces (update)
• 2005-06-30 03:44 initializing wider-than-pointers

dk zhou

• 2005-06-01 11:22 Hello,Gnu

Dorit Naishlos

• 2005-06-10 21:10 Re: Use of check_vect() in vectorizer testsuite
• 2005-06-14 06:27 Re: Use of check_vect() in vectorizer testsuite
• 2005-06-18 21:48 towards reduction part 3/n: what does vec lower pass do to vector shifts?
• 2005-06-19 16:34 Re: towards reduction part 3/n: what does vec lower pass do to vectorshifts?
• 2005-06-19 17:08 Re: towards reduction part 3/n: what does vec lower pass do to vectorshifts?
• 2005-06-19 20:55 Re: towards reduction part 3/n: what does vec lower pass do to vectorshifts?
• 2005-06-20 14:56 Re: towards reduction part 3/n: what does vec lower pass do to vectorshifts?

Douglas Gregor

• 2005-06-22 03:52 [4.0.0] "make check-g++" fails linking tests on powerpc-apple-darwin7.9.0

E. Weddington

• 2005-06-05 16:00 Re: Killing fixproto (possible target obsoletion)
• 2005-06-07 00:07 Re: Will Apple still support signed overflow?
• 2005-06-16 16:24 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-29 15:37 Re: named address spaces (update)
• 2005-06-29 15:38 Re: named address spaces (update)

Eric Botcazou

• 2005-06-02 12:24 Re: Can't bootstrap current gcc cvs trunk on sparc-linux: SIGSEGV: build/genattrtab /usr/local/src/trunk/gcc/gcc/config/sparc/sparc.md > tmp-attrtab.c
• 2005-06-03 22:12 Re: Ada front-end depends on signed overflow
• 2005-06-04 07:26 Re: Ada front-end depends on signed overflow
• 2005-06-04 09:12 Re: Can't bootstrap current gcc cvs trunk on sparc-linux: SIGSEGV: build/genattrtab /usr/local/src/trunk/gcc/gcc/config/sparc/sparc.md > tmp-attrtab.c
• 2005-06-05 13:36 Re: Ada front-end depends on signed overflow
• 2005-06-06 09:56 Re: Ada front-end depends on signed overflow
• 2005-06-08 10:27 MEMBER_TYPE_FORCES_BLK on IA-64/HP-UX
• 2005-06-09 20:45 Re: obj-c++ on sparc-linux: objc runtime: cannot find class Derived etc...
• 2005-06-09 21:27 Re: Getting started with contributing
• 2005-06-10 06:40 Re: obj-c++ on sparc-linux: objc runtime: cannot find class Derived etc...
• 2005-06-10 08:45 Re: obj-c++ on sparc-linux: objc runtime: cannot find class Derived etc...
• 2005-06-10 09:02 Re: GCC 4.01 RC1 Available
• 2005-06-12 07:11 Re: Getting started with contributing
• 2005-06-15 19:07 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-16 08:57 Re: GCC 4.0.1 Status (2005-06-13)
• 2005-06-16 15:12 Re: GCC 4.0.1 Status (2005-06-13)
• 2005-06-16 22:08 Re: GCC 4.0.1 Status (2005-06-13)
• 2005-06-18 22:27 Re: GCC 4.0.1 RC2
• 2005-06-27 12:32 Re: [Ada] Current patch needed to build Ada as of 20050626
• 2005-06-29 06:59 Re: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC)
• 2005-06-29 08:48 Re: The utility of standard's semantics for overflow
• 2005-06-29 16:19 Re: The utility of standard's semantics for overflow

Eric Christopher

• 2005-06-02 18:29 Re: Can't bootstrap trunk on hppa
• 2005-06-06 18:16 Re: Follow up on simulators, documentation, etc.
• 2005-06-14 18:30 Re: MIPS Tri-arch Question
• 2005-06-20 05:41 Re: Error building 4.0.1-RC2
• 2005-06-20 05:50 Re: Error building 4.0.1-RC2
• 2005-06-21 22:17 Re: Error building 4.0.1-RC2
• 2005-06-21 22:31 Re: Error building 4.0.1-RC2
• 2005-06-21 22:44 Re: Error building 4.0.1-RC2
• 2005-06-23 01:09 Re: Error building 4.0.1-RC2

Eric Liu

• 2005-06-24 09:42 Cross compiler

Falk Hueffner

• 2005-06-28 07:39 Re: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC)
• 2005-06-28 22:16 Re: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC)

Fariborz Jahanian

• 2005-06-24 22:06 [RFH] - Less than optimal code compiling 252.eon -O2 for x86
• 2005-06-27 19:20 Re: [RFH] - Less than optimal code compiling 252.eon -O2 for x86
• 2005-06-27 21:52 Re: [RFH] - Less than optimal code compiling 252.eon -O2 for x86
• 2005-06-30 19:06 Re: [RFH] - Less than optimal code compiling 252.eon -O2 for x86
• 2005-06-30 21:30 Re: [RFH] - Less than optimal code compiling 252.eon -O2 for x86

Fei, Fei

• 2005-06-09 07:28 Any docs about gcov impl change from 3.3 to 3.4
• 2005-06-09 09:39 RE: Any docs about gcov impl change from 3.3 to 3.4

Feng Wang

• 2005-06-21 14:21 How to write testcase with two warnings on one line?
• 2005-06-21 14:54 回复： Re: How to write testcase with two warnings on one line?
• 2005-06-22 01:55 Re: How to write testcase with two warnings on one line?

fjahanian

• 2005-06-24 23:46 Re: [RFH] - Less than optimal code compiling 252.eon -O2 for x86
• 2005-06-30 14:42 Re: [RFH] - Less than optimal code compiling 252.eon -O2 for x86
• 2005-06-30 15:03 Re: [RFH] - Less than optimal code compiling 252.eon -O2 for x86
• 2005-06-30 16:04 Re: [RFH] - Less than optimal code compiling 252.eon -O2 for x86

Florian Krohm

• 2005-06-19 02:41 Re: c/c++ validator

Florian Weimer

• 2005-06-03 13:02 Re: Ada front-end depends on signed overflow
• 2005-06-03 15:18 Re: Ada front-end depends on signed overflow
• 2005-06-03 16:01 Re: Ada front-end depends on signed overflow
• 2005-06-03 16:25 Re: Ada front-end depends on signed overflow
• 2005-06-05 19:54 Re: collab.net have a spam open relay in operation at the moment. please give them grief about it.
• 2005-06-07 07:56 Re: Ada front-end depends on signed overflow
• 2005-06-07 14:06 Re: Ada front-end depends on signed overflow
• 2005-06-07 15:47 Re: Ada front-end depends on signed overflow
• 2005-06-13 15:08 Re: strange double comparison results with -O[12] on x86(-32)
• 2005-06-13 17:37 Re: strange double comparison results with -O[12] on x86(-32)
• 2005-06-13 21:15 Re: PATCH: Explicitly pass --64 to assembler on AMD64 targets
• 2005-06-14 17:12 Re: copyright assignment
• 2005-06-15 19:22 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-18 21:01 Re: basic VRP min/max range overflow question
• 2005-06-21 16:44 Re: Template declaration inside function

Frank Ch. Eigler

• 2005-06-15 15:16 Re: mudflap cache question

Fred Fish

• 2005-06-15 01:12 Re: [Gdb-discuss] Re: x86 Q: why aren't the SSE intrinsics always_inline?
• 2005-06-15 01:48 Re: [Gdb-discuss] Re: x86 Q: why aren't the SSE intrinsics always_inline?

Frederic Stark

• 2005-06-21 11:13 Problem implementing faults in Objective-C
• 2005-06-21 17:20 Re: Problem implementing faults in Objective-C

FX Coudert

• 2005-06-17 06:02 Re: Regressions

Gabriel Dos Reis

• 2005-06-08 14:41 Re: Ada front-end depends on signed overflow
• 2005-06-09 22:59 extern const and all that
• 2005-06-10 04:55 Re: extern const and all that
• 2005-06-10 14:17 Re: Question about new warning system
• 2005-06-10 14:32 Re: Question about new warning system
• 2005-06-10 15:13 Re: Question about new warning system
• 2005-06-10 15:13 Re: Question about new warning system
• 2005-06-15 02:29 Re: Fixing Bugs (Was: A Suggestion for Release Testing)
• 2005-06-15 16:50 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-15 16:53 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-15 23:23 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-16 13:21 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-16 14:29 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-16 14:59 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-16 15:13 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-16 20:40 Re: Porposal: Floating-Point Options
• 2005-06-19 00:45 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-19 01:03 Re: c/c++ validator
• 2005-06-19 02:05 Re: c/c++ validator
• 2005-06-19 02:48 Re: c/c++ validator
• 2005-06-19 09:12 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-19 09:42 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-19 09:47 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-19 13:48 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-19 13:52 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-19 13:54 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-19 15:33 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-19 15:55 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-19 16:06 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-19 16:17 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-19 22:45 Re: GCC 4.0.1 RC2
• 2005-06-19 23:26 Re: GCC 4.0.1 RC2
• 2005-06-20 12:09 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-21 15:33 Re: An Rvalue references for g++ patch
• 2005-06-22 20:17 Re: cpp, CPLUS_INCLUDE_PATH, and g++: bug or feature?
• 2005-06-27 14:10 Re: Do C++ signed types have modulo semantics?
• 2005-06-27 15:17 Re: Do C++ signed types have modulo semantics?
• 2005-06-27 15:21 Re: Do C++ signed types have modulo semantics?
• 2005-06-28 03:49 Re: Do C++ signed types have modulo semantics?
• 2005-06-28 04:34 Re: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC)
• 2005-06-28 05:13 Re: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC)
• 2005-06-28 06:01 Re: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC)
• 2005-06-28 11:50 Re: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC)
• 2005-06-28 12:01 Re: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC)
• 2005-06-28 12:08 Re: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC)
• 2005-06-28 12:33 Re: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC)
• 2005-06-28 12:34 Re: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC)
• 2005-06-28 13:19 Re: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC)
• 2005-06-28 13:59 Re: Do C++ signed types have modulo semantics?
• 2005-06-28 14:13 Re: Do C++ signed types have modulo semantics?
• 2005-06-28 14:47 Re: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC)
• 2005-06-28 15:55 Re: Do C++ signed types have modulo semantics?
• 2005-06-28 16:39 Re: Do C++ signed types have modulo semantics?
• 2005-06-28 17:03 Re: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC)
• 2005-06-28 17:58 Re: Do C++ signed types have modulo semantics?
• 2005-06-28 18:09 Re: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC)
• 2005-06-28 18:21 Re: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC)
• 2005-06-28 18:56 Re: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC)
• 2005-06-28 19:02 Re: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC)
• 2005-06-28 19:25 Re: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC)
• 2005-06-28 19:43 Re: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC)
• 2005-06-28 19:48 Re: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC)
• 2005-06-28 20:51 Re: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC)
• 2005-06-28 20:58 Re: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC)
• 2005-06-28 21:20 Re: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC)
• 2005-06-28 23:53 Re: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC)
• 2005-06-29 00:43 Re: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC)
• 2005-06-29 01:14 Re: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC)
• 2005-06-30 22:26 Re: Should GCC publish a general rule/warning due to it's default presumption of undefined signed integer overflow semantics?

Gabriel Paubert

• 2005-06-15 13:45 Re: Bug related to floating-point traps?
• 2005-06-28 13:47 Re: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC)

Gabriele Inghirami

• 2005-06-04 20:56 Successfully built gcc 3.4.4 on PII 450 running GNU/Linux Slackware10.1

gccadmin

• 2005-06-02 23:49 gcc-4.0-20050602 is now available
• 2005-06-04 18:04 gcc-4.1-20050604 is now available
• 2005-06-08 00:00 gcc-3.4-20050607 is now available
• 2005-06-09 23:54 gcc-4.0-20050609 is now available
• 2005-06-11 18:05 gcc-4.1-20050611 is now available
• 2005-06-15 00:03 gcc-3.4-20050614 is now available
• 2005-06-17 01:23 gcc-4.0-20050616 is now available
• 2005-06-18 18:12 gcc-4.1-20050618 is now available
• 2005-06-21 23:34 gcc-3.4-20050621 is now available
• 2005-06-24 00:06 gcc-4.0-20050623 is now available
• 2005-06-25 18:06 gcc-4.1-20050625 is now available
• 2005-06-29 00:02 gcc-3.4-20050628 is now available
• 2005-06-30 23:55 gcc-4.0-20050630 is now available

Geert Bosch

• 2005-06-03 19:37 Re: Is it possible to catch overflow in long long multiply ?
• 2005-06-03 20:24 Re: Ada front-end depends on signed overflow

Geoff Keating

• 2005-06-19 22:52 Re: GCC 4.0.1 RC2

Geoffrey Keating

• 2005-06-03 00:41 Re: Lowering of types?
• 2005-06-13 22:58 Re: GCC 4.0.1 Status (2005-06-05)
• 2005-06-15 21:27 Re: Porposal: Floating-Point Options
• 2005-06-16 18:20 Re: Porposal: Floating-Point Options
• 2005-06-19 21:56 Re: GCC 4.0.1 RC2
• 2005-06-22 21:35 Re: CFT: toplevel bootstrap (stage 2 project)
• 2005-06-24 02:07 Re: dead label use?
• 2005-06-29 21:57 Re:
• 2005-06-30 21:12 Re: [C++] Re: PARM_DECL of DECL_SIZE 0, but TYPE_SIZE of 96 bits

Georg Bauhaus

• 2005-06-06 11:25 Re: Tracking down gcc-4.0 performance regressions
• 2005-06-09 00:09 Re: Ada front-end depends on signed overflow
• 2005-06-28 22:41 Re: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC)
• 2005-06-28 22:58 Re: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC)

George R Goffe

• 2005-06-29 06:04 A question about a possible build problem.

Gerald Pfeifer

• 2005-06-12 17:51 Re: A Suggestion for Release Testing
• 2005-06-22 19:44 Re: What is wrong with Bugzilla?
• 2005-06-22 19:48 cpp, CPLUS_INCLUDE_PATH, and g++: bug or feature?
• 2005-06-24 23:11 Re: toplevel bootstrap (stage 2 project)
• 2005-06-26 13:42 Re: GCC 3.3.6 has been released
• 2005-06-26 16:11 Re: cpp, CPLUS_INCLUDE_PATH, and g++: bug or feature?
• 2005-06-26 16:53 Re: makeinfo 4.8 generates non-standard HTML for @emph{..@samp{..}..}
• 2005-06-30 21:32 Re: errors when compiling gcc-3.4.4 and gcc-4.0.0 on i386 freebsd-5.2.1.

Giovanni Bajo

• 2005-06-09 10:29 Use of check_vect() in vectorizer testsuite
• 2005-06-09 15:24 Re: Use of check_vect() in vectorizer testsuite
• 2005-06-09 17:37 Re: Use of check_vect() in vectorizer testsuite
• 2005-06-09 23:24 Re: Getting started with contributing
• 2005-06-10 13:41 Question about new warning system
• 2005-06-10 14:13 Re: Question about new warning system
• 2005-06-10 14:17 Re: Question about new warning system
• 2005-06-10 14:36 Re: Question about new warning system
• 2005-06-13 19:20 Re: In current gcc trunk: warning: dereferencing type-punned pointer will break strict-aliasing rules
• 2005-06-15 00:06 Re: Fixing Bugs (Was: A Suggestion for Release Testing)
• 2005-06-15 01:57 PR 14814
• 2005-06-15 09:11 Re: Bug in transparent union handling?
• 2005-06-15 15:03 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-16 02:44 Re: Bug in transparent union handling?
• 2005-06-17 23:44 Your rtti.c changes broke some obj-c++ tests
• 2005-06-21 16:04 Re: How to write testcase with two warnings on one line?
• 2005-06-22 19:00 Re: toplevel bootstrap (stage 2 project)
• 2005-06-28 09:43 Re: toplevel bootstrap (stage 2 project)
• 2005-06-28 17:00 Re: toplevel bootstrap (stage 2 project)
• 2005-06-28 17:32 Re: G++ and ISO C++
• 2005-06-30 18:25 Re: [RFH] - Less than optimal code compiling 252.eon -O2 for x86
• 2005-06-30 18:48 Re: PARM_DECL of DECL_SIZE 0, but TYPE_SIZE of 96 bits

Graham Pratt

• 2005-06-24 13:27 Suggestion for simple feature - "beep" on finish.

Graham Stott

• 2005-06-15 14:35 Re: Visual C++ style inline asms

H. J. Lu

• 2005-06-20 06:21 PATCH: PR/1025: binutils failed to build gcc 4.0.1 20050619
• 2005-06-20 13:13 PATCH: PR 1022: binutils failed to build gcc 4.0.1 20050619
• 2005-06-20 18:16 PATCH: PR 1025: binutils failed to build gcc 4.0.1 20050619
• 2005-06-23 00:56 The Linux binutils 2.16.91.0.1 is released

Haren Visavadia

• 2005-06-07 09:24 Re: Subversion migration plans
• 2005-06-16 12:35 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-16 15:57 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-19 10:17 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters

Herman ten Brugge

• 2005-06-14 20:33 mudflap cache question

Ian Lance Taylor

• 2005-06-04 02:58 Re: GCC 3.3.1 -O2 problem with sqrt.c
• 2005-06-05 02:16 Re: RFC: Strategy for cc0 -> CCmode conversion for the AVR target.
• 2005-06-07 14:57 Re: OCODE Backend
• 2005-06-23 02:43 Re: dead label use?

ibanez

• 2005-06-14 08:45 About macro: SYMBOL_REF_SMALL_P
• 2005-06-16 10:18 The tree API

Jakub Jelinek

• 2005-06-01 08:19 Re: ERROR in the gfortran testsuite
• 2005-06-02 12:26 Re: duplicate -lgcc --as-needed -lgcc_s --no-as-needed
• 2005-06-03 09:14 Re: sizeof(int) in testsuite
• 2005-06-03 09:21 Re: sizeof(int) in testsuite
• 2005-06-03 10:03 Re: duplicate -lgcc --as-needed -lgcc_s --no-as-needed
• 2005-06-08 09:10 Re: Howto biarch compiler default to -m32?
• 2005-06-15 14:14 po file update
• 2005-06-16 13:38 Re: GCC 4.0.1 Status (2005-06-13)
• 2005-06-16 15:40 Re: GCC 4.0.1 Status (2005-06-13)
• 2005-06-18 22:33 Re: Forward: gcc-4.0.1-b20050607.de.po [REJECTED]
• 2005-06-19 20:20 Re: GCC 4.0.1 RC2
• 2005-06-27 14:26 Re: expanding builtins

James A. Morrison

• 2005-06-06 13:37 Re: increase in code size with gcc3.2
• 2005-06-13 02:58 Re: a "hello world" frontend
• 2005-06-14 03:47 Re: a "hello world" frontend
• 2005-06-14 15:50 Re: copyright assignment
• 2005-06-15 22:06 Re: Fixing Bugs (Was: A Suggestion for Release Testing)
• 2005-06-16 16:06 Re: The tree API
• 2005-06-27 23:36 Re: Q about Ada and value ranges in types

James E Wilson

• 2005-06-30 21:46 Re: Pro64-based GPLed compiler
• 2005-06-30 22:11 Re: Scheduler questions (related to PR17808)
• 2005-06-30 22:28 Re: Scheduler questions (related to PR17808)

James Lemke

• 2005-06-03 15:03 GCC Summit - rooms
• 2005-06-27 14:12 expanding builtins
• 2005-06-27 15:30 Re: expanding builtins

Jan Beulich

• 2005-06-17 12:01 building 3.4.x with in-tree binutils 2.16.*

Jan Hubicka

• 2005-06-02 20:00 Re: Edges, predictions, and GC crashes ...
• 2005-06-03 19:05 Re: Edges, predictions, and GC crashes ...
• 2005-06-04 10:57 Re: Edges, predictions, and GC crashes ...
• 2005-06-12 09:39 Re: Big differences on SpecFP results for gcc and icc
• 2005-06-14 11:29 Re: PATCH: Explicitly pass --64 to assembler on AMD64 targets
• 2005-06-14 11:36 Re: PATCH: Explicitly pass --64 to assembler on AMD64 targets
• 2005-06-16 20:47 Re: x86-linux bootstrap broken on mainline?
• 2005-06-16 20:57 Re: x86-linux bootstrap broken on mainline?
• 2005-06-18 18:33 Re: Regressions
• 2005-06-18 18:52 Re: Fortran left broken for a couple of days now

Jan-Benedict Glaw

• 2005-06-05 16:55 Re: Proposed obsoletions

Jani Monoses

• 2005-06-07 15:27 ARM and __attribute__ long_call error
• 2005-06-08 10:15 Re: ARM and __attribute__ long_call error
• 2005-06-08 10:53 Re: ARM and __attribute__ long_call error
• 2005-06-08 11:25 Re: ARM and __attribute__ long_call error
• 2005-06-22 05:46 Re: Cross compiler libgcc.a with -mthumb-interwork

Janis Johnson

• 2005-06-09 15:39 Re: Any docs about gcov impl change from 3.3 to 3.4
• 2005-06-09 16:00 Re: Use of check_vect() in vectorizer testsuite

Jason Mancini

• 2005-06-22 19:31 RE: gcc template error?

Jeffrey A Law

• 2005-06-06 16:17 Re: Proposed obsoletions
• 2005-06-07 02:18 Re: VRP in release version of GCC
• 2005-06-28 15:41 Re: GCC 4.0.1 Status (2005-06-27)
• 2005-06-28 16:07 Re: GCC 4.0.1 Status (2005-06-27)
• 2005-06-28 18:38 Re: GCC 4.0.1 Status (2005-06-27)
• 2005-06-28 20:08 Re: GCC 4.0.1 Status (2005-06-27)
• 2005-06-29 21:54 Re: Re:
• 2005-06-29 23:45 Re: Re: hpux regression vs 4.0.1
• 2005-06-30 17:48 Re: [RFH] - Less than optimal code compiling 252.eon -O2 for x86
• 2005-06-30 18:23 Re: [RFH] - Less than optimal code compiling 252.eon -O2 for x86

Jerry DeLisle

• 2005-06-12 21:59 Typo in man page (atanh)

Jeyasankar Kottalam

• 2005-06-01 05:35 Google Summer of Code

Jim Gifford

• 2005-06-14 08:05 MIPS Tri-arch Question
• 2005-06-14 20:13 Re: MIPS Tri-arch Question

Joe Buck

• 2005-06-03 16:15 Re: Ada front-end depends on signed overflow
• 2005-06-03 16:17 Re: sizeof(int) in testsuite
• 2005-06-03 16:49 Re: Ada front-end depends on signed overflow
• 2005-06-03 21:02 Re: Is it possible to catch overflow in long long multiply ?
• 2005-06-06 19:43 Re: Will Apple still support GCC development?
• 2005-06-07 17:10 Re: Gcc 3.0 and unnamed struct: incorrect offsets
• 2005-06-07 22:22 Re: Ada front-end depends on signed overflow
• 2005-06-08 16:34 Re: Ada front-end depends on signed overflow
• 2005-06-09 23:38 Re: A Suggestion for Release Testing
• 2005-06-22 16:43 Re: Blogging the gcc summit
• 2005-06-22 21:33 Re: cpp, CPLUS_INCLUDE_PATH, and g++: bug or feature?
• 2005-06-27 16:40 Re: [RFC] gcov tool, comparing coverage across platforms
• 2005-06-28 16:15 Re: GCC 4.0.1 Status (2005-06-27)
• 2005-06-28 16:32 Re: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC)
• 2005-06-28 16:38 Re: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC)
• 2005-06-28 16:42 Re: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC)
• 2005-06-28 16:54 Re: Do C++ signed types have modulo semantics?
• 2005-06-28 16:56 Re: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC)
• 2005-06-28 17:21 Re: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC)
• 2005-06-28 17:34 Re: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC)
• 2005-06-28 17:51 Re: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC)
• 2005-06-28 21:35 Re: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC)
• 2005-06-28 21:41 Re: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC)
• 2005-06-28 21:44 Re: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC)
• 2005-06-28 21:48 Re: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC)
• 2005-06-29 04:18 Re: Do CO++ signed types have modulo semantics?
• 2005-06-29 17:00 Re: Do CO++ signed types have modulo semantics?
• 2005-06-29 23:17 Re: Re:
• 2005-06-30 18:19 Re: [RFH] - Less than optimal code compiling 252.eon -O2 for x86
• 2005-06-30 22:06 Re: Should GCC publish a general rule/warning due to it's default presumption of undefined signed integer overflow semantics?
• 2005-06-30 23:25 Re: Should GCC publish a general rule/warning due to it's default presumption of undefined signed integer overflow semantics?

Joel Sherrill <joel at OARcorp dot com>

• 2005-06-06 14:09 Re: Killing fixproto (possible target obsoletion)
• 2005-06-07 15:07 Andreas Schwab m68k Maintainer

John Carter

• 2005-06-21 22:35 Cross compiler libgcc.a with -mthumb-interwork

John David Anglin

• 2005-06-02 17:32 Can't bootstrap trunk on hppa
• 2005-06-11 16:39 Re: Problems with collect2 on hpux
• 2005-06-15 04:00 Re: Problems with collect2 on hpux
• 2005-06-19 20:22 Re: Libstdc++ versioning issues
• 2005-06-30 00:34 Re: Re: hpux regression vs 4.0.1

Jonathan Bastien-Filiatrault

• 2005-06-13 17:01 GCC port for the TI TMS320C5{4,5}x

Jonathan Wakely

• 2005-06-01 11:34 Re: help needed
• 2005-06-09 19:54 Re: GCC 4.01 RC1 Available
• 2005-06-09 20:27 Re: GCC 4.01 RC1 Available
• 2005-06-15 16:45 Re: help using mingw/gcc
• 2005-06-16 14:57 Re: Fixing Bugs (Was: A Suggestion for Release Testing)
• 2005-06-20 09:25 Re: libstdc++-libc6.1-1.so.2 libraries

Jonathan Wilson

• 2005-06-28 14:28 Re: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC)

Joseph S. Myers

• 2005-06-06 12:07 Re: recommend use of gperf version 3
• 2005-06-10 01:43 Re: position of section() attribute question
• 2005-06-10 02:21 Re: position of section() attribute question
• 2005-06-10 18:54 Re: position of section() attribute question
• 2005-06-14 14:46 Re: Fixing Bugs (Was: A Suggestion for Release Testing)
• 2005-06-15 15:31 Re: po file update
• 2005-06-16 15:10 Re: Porposal: Floating-Point Options
• 2005-06-16 19:20 Re: Porposal: Floating-Point Options
• 2005-06-18 16:19 Re: basic VRP min/max range overflow question
• 2005-06-18 18:08 Re: basic VRP min/max range overflow question
• 2005-06-18 18:21 Re: basic VRP min/max range overflow question
• 2005-06-18 19:57 Re: basic VRP min/max range overflow question
• 2005-06-19 18:10 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-20 10:56 Re: Error building 4.0.1-RC2
• 2005-06-20 16:07 Re: Someone introduced a libiberty crashing bug in the past week
• 2005-06-21 17:55 Re: How to write testcase with two warnings on one line?
• 2005-06-23 16:55 Re: Changelog question for the FSF address change
• 2005-06-28 16:47 Re: Do C++ signed types have modulo semantics?
• 2005-06-28 22:09 Re: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC)

Kai Henningsen

• 2005-06-16 21:15 Re: Fixing Bugs
• 2005-06-19 10:18 Re: basic VRP min/max range overflow question
• 2005-06-19 10:18 Re: basic VRP min/max range overflow question
• 2005-06-20 19:53 Re: c/c++ validator
• 2005-06-20 19:53 Re: basic VRP min/max range overflow question
• 2005-06-30 20:53 Re: Do C++ signed types have modulo semantics?

Kai Ruottu

• 2005-06-19 20:43 Re: some compile problem about gcc-2.95.3
• 2005-06-19 20:56 Re: some compile problem about gcc-2.95.3

Karel Gardas

• 2005-06-03 06:42 Re: Please help ...
• 2005-06-07 06:43 Re: Making GCC faster

Karl Berry

• 2005-06-27 17:03 Re: makeinfo 4.8 generates non-standard HTML for @emph{..@samp{..}..}

Kazu Hirata

• 2005-06-24 06:15 No tail call optimization in Thumb mode?

Kelley Cook

• 2005-06-23 16:00 Changelog question for the FSF address change

kfogel

• 2005-06-05 18:13 Re: collab.net have a spam open relay in operation at the moment. please give them grief about it.

Kurt Wall

• 2005-06-28 17:00 Re: G++ and ISO C++

Lassi A . Tuura

• 2005-06-08 14:26 Re: Ada front-end depends on signed overflow

Laurent GUERBY

• 2005-06-06 21:47 Re: What is wrong with Bugzilla? [Was: Re: GCC and Floating-Point]
• 2005-06-14 20:19 Re: Fixing Bugs (Was: A Suggestion for Release Testing)
• 2005-06-16 18:03 x86-linux bootstrap broken on mainline?
• 2005-06-18 21:33 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustratingreporters
• 2005-06-18 21:52 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain infrustrating reporters
• 2005-06-26 21:00 [Ada] Current patch needed to build Ada as of 20050626
• 2005-06-28 20:50 [Ada] Patch needed to boostrap Ada on x86_64 as of 20050628
• 2005-06-29 06:16 Re: [Ada] Patch needed to boostrap Ada on x86_64 as of 20050628

Lee Millward

• 2005-06-09 20:47 Getting started with contributing

Ling-hua Tseng

• 2005-06-19 17:20 question about match_operand and vec_select

Liu Haibin

• 2005-06-23 08:47 -fprofile-arcs changes the structure of basic blocks
• 2005-06-24 03:01 Re: -fprofile-arcs changes the structure of basic blocks
• 2005-06-27 08:56 Re: -fprofile-arcs changes the structure of basic blocks

Marc

• 2005-06-29 21:28 Re: Pro64-based GPLed compiler

Marc Espie

• 2005-06-06 20:52 Re: Will Apple still support GCC development?

Marc Gonzalez-Sigler

• 2005-06-29 15:46 Pro64-based GPLed compiler

Marcin Dalecki

• 2005-06-01 01:57 Re: What is wrong with Bugzilla? [Was: Re: GCC and Floating-Point]
• 2005-06-09 13:47 Re: Tracking down source of libgcc_s.so compatibility?
• 2005-06-14 22:32 Re: Porposal: Floating-Point Options
• 2005-06-14 22:55 Re: Porposal: Floating-Point Options
• 2005-06-15 05:41 Re: Porposal: Floating-Point Options
• 2005-06-15 21:13 Re: Porposal: Floating-Point Options
• 2005-06-19 20:21 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-29 02:19 Re: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC)

Mark Hahn

• 2005-06-16 14:12 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters

Mark Kettenis

• 2005-06-24 21:44 Re: removing src/{expect,dejagnu}

Mark Loeser

• 2005-06-19 03:04 Re: c/c++ validator

Mark Mitchell

• 2005-06-03 08:48 Re: sizeof(int) in testsuite
• 2005-06-03 09:08 Re: sizeof(int) in testsuite
• 2005-06-05 17:18 GCC 4.0.1 Status (2005-06-05)
• 2005-06-05 17:29 Re: GCC 4.0.1 Status (2005-06-05)
• 2005-06-05 17:55 Re: GCC 4.0.1 Status (2005-06-05)
• 2005-06-05 18:01 Re: GCC 4.0.1 Status (2005-06-05)
• 2005-06-05 18:12 Follow up on simulators, documentation, etc.
• 2005-06-05 18:13 Re: GCC 4.0.1 Status (2005-06-05)
• 2005-06-05 18:18 Re: Proposed obsoletions
• 2005-06-06 00:30 Re: GCC 4.0.1 Status (2005-06-05)
• 2005-06-06 14:43 Re: Proposed obsoletions
• 2005-06-06 14:46 Re: Follow up on simulators, documentation, etc.
• 2005-06-07 23:40 GCC 4.0.1 RC1 bits will be spun RSN
• 2005-06-08 16:58 GCC 4.01 RC1 Available
• 2005-06-08 17:24 Re: GCC 4.01 RC1 Available
• 2005-06-10 22:02 gfortran backports to 4.0
• 2005-06-13 16:38 GCC 4.0.1 Status (2005-06-13)
• 2005-06-13 18:16 PATCH: Explicitly pass --64 to assembler on AMD64 targets
• 2005-06-13 22:35 Re: PATCH: Explicitly pass --64 to assembler on AMD64 targets
• 2005-06-14 06:39 Re: A Suggestion for Release Testing
• 2005-06-14 16:01 Re: Fixing Bugs (Was: A Suggestion for Release Testing)
• 2005-06-14 23:44 Libstdc++ versioning issues
• 2005-06-15 16:53 Re: po file update
• 2005-06-16 18:46 Re: GCC 4.0.1 Status (2005-06-13)
• 2005-06-17 23:01 GCC 4.0.1 RC2
• 2005-06-18 18:46 Re: GCC 4.0.1 RC2
• 2005-06-22 14:06 Re: Error building 4.0.1-RC2
• 2005-06-23 14:08 GCC 4.0.1 Status
• 2005-06-23 21:05 Re: GCC 4.0.1 Status
• 2005-06-28 03:06 Re: Do C++ signed types have modulo semantics?
• 2005-06-28 07:22 GCC 4.0.1 Status (2005-06-27)
• 2005-06-28 15:51 Re: GCC 4.0.1 Status (2005-06-27)
• 2005-06-28 17:02 Re: Do C++ signed types have modulo semantics?
• 2005-06-28 18:12 Re: Do C++ signed types have modulo semantics?
• 2005-06-29 05:17 Re: stage 2 date?
• 2005-06-29 20:40 Re:

Mark Williams (MWP)

• 2005-06-20 05:32 Error building 4.0.1-RC2
• 2005-06-20 05:46 Re: Error building 4.0.1-RC2
• 2005-06-20 06:12 Re: Error building 4.0.1-RC2

Martin Koegler

• 2005-06-29 08:48 named address spaces (update)

Mathieu Malaterre

• 2005-06-06 21:06 ld: common symbols not allowed with MH_DYLIB output format with the -multi_module option
• 2005-06-06 22:20 Re: ld: common symbols not allowed with MH_DYLIB output
• 2005-06-10 21:48 Re: ld: common symbols not allowed with MH_DYLIB output format with the -multi_module option
• 2005-06-18 22:32 Re: c/c++ validator
• 2005-06-19 02:16 Re: c/c++ validator

Matthew Sachs

• 2005-06-14 02:36 Re: A Suggestion for Release Testing
• 2005-06-14 08:02 Re: A Suggestion for Release Testing

Matthew Wilcox

• 2005-06-17 13:58 Keysigning at GCC summit

Mattias Karlsson

• 2005-06-18 10:54 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-18 13:05 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-18 13:52 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-19 08:59 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-19 09:29 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-21 16:39 Template declaration inside function
• 2005-06-21 17:02 Re: Template declaration inside function

Menezes, Evandro

• 2005-06-13 16:20 RE: Big differences on SpecFP results for gcc and icc
• 2005-06-13 16:27 RE: Big differences on SpecFP results for gcc and icc
• 2005-06-16 19:47 RE: Porposal: Floating-Point Options

mhauff at bigpond dot net dot au

• 2005-06-15 07:16 Expanding an ADDSI3 into 2 x ADDHI3 does not work

Michael Matz

• 2005-06-13 15:05 RFA: Integrate ABI testsuite in GCC

Michael Meissner

• 2005-06-18 02:47 Re: Visual C++ style inline asms
• 2005-06-21 09:55 Re: How to replace -O1 with corresponding -f's?

Michael Veksler

• 2005-06-08 16:07 Re: Ada front-end depends on signed overflow
• 2005-06-08 20:04 Re: Ada front-end depends on signed overflow
• 2005-06-19 15:45 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-20 07:51 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-20 09:50 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-20 10:14 Re: basic VRP min/max range overflow question
• 2005-06-20 12:23 Re: basic VRP min/max range overflow question
• 2005-06-20 12:53 Re: basic VRP min/max range overflow question
• 2005-06-20 14:54 Re: basic VRP min/max range overflow question
• 2005-06-27 05:09 Do C++ signed types have modulo semantics?
• 2005-06-27 15:21 Re: Do C++ signed types have modulo semantics?
• 2005-06-28 04:20 Re: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC)
• 2005-06-28 07:20 Re: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC)
• 2005-06-28 07:25 Re: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC)
• 2005-06-28 12:35 Re: Do C++ signed types have modulo semantics?
• 2005-06-28 15:30 Re: Do C++ signed types have modulo semantics?
• 2005-06-28 15:58 Re: Do C++ signed types have modulo semantics?
• 2005-06-28 18:44 Re: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC)
• 2005-06-28 21:53 Re: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC)
• 2005-06-28 23:05 Re: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC)
• 2005-06-29 08:33 The utility of standard's semantics for overflow
• 2005-06-29 09:04 Re: The utility of standard's semantics for overflow
• 2005-06-29 11:16 Re: The utility of standard's semantics for overflow

Mike Hearn

• 2005-06-13 17:44 Re: Tracking down source of libgcc_s.so compatibility?
• 2005-06-19 12:53 Re: Libstdc++ versioning issues
• 2005-06-19 15:46 Re: Libstdc++ versioning issues

Mike Stump

• 2005-06-01 17:29 Re: Mac OS X Panther to Tiger Build Changes for GCC 3.3 and 3.4
• 2005-06-01 17:32 Re: What is wrong with Bugzilla? [Was: Re: GCC and Floating-Point]
• 2005-06-01 17:46 Re: Hello,Gnu
• 2005-06-01 18:33 Re: What is wrong with Bugzilla? [Was: Re: GCC and Floating-Point]
• 2005-06-02 03:39 Re: Mac OS X Panther to Tiger Build Changes for GCC 3.3 and 3.4
• 2005-06-10 19:28 Re: recommend use of gperf version 3
• 2005-06-10 19:47 Re: ld: common symbols not allowed with MH_DYLIB output format with the -multi_module option
• 2005-06-10 19:51 Re: Gcc 3.0 and unnamed struct: incorrect offsets
• 2005-06-10 20:51 Re: rationale for bss patterns in default_section_type_flags ?
• 2005-06-10 22:27 Re: ld: common symbols not allowed with MH_DYLIB output format with the -multi_module option
• 2005-06-10 22:33 Re: rationale for bss patterns in default_section_type_flags ?
• 2005-06-10 23:39 Re: ld: common symbols not allowed with MH_DYLIB output format with the -multi_module option
• 2005-06-11 00:42 Re: rationale for bss patterns in default_section_type_flags ?
• 2005-06-13 18:06 Re: rationale for bss patterns in default_section_type_flags ?
• 2005-06-13 23:13 Re: A Suggestion for Release Testing
• 2005-06-15 01:25 Visual C++ style inline asms
• 2005-06-15 20:56 Re: Visual C++ style inline asms
• 2005-06-15 21:06 Re: Visual C++ style inline asms
• 2005-06-15 22:27 Re: Visual C++ style inline asms
• 2005-06-15 22:46 Re: Visual C++ style inline asms
• 2005-06-16 00:12 Re: 4.0.0->4.0.1 regression: Can't use 64-bit shared libs on powerpc-apple-darwin8.1.0
• 2005-06-16 06:30 Re: 4.0.0->4.0.1 regression: Can't use 64-bit shared libs on powerpc-apple-darwin8.1.0
• 2005-06-16 20:06 Re: 4.0.0->4.0.1 regression: Can't use 64-bit shared libs on powerpc-apple-darwin8.1.0
• 2005-06-18 03:49 Re: PowerPC small data sections.
• 2005-06-18 04:09 Re: basic VRP min/max range overflow question
• 2005-06-18 04:39 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-18 05:12 Re: The tree API
• 2005-06-20 21:47 Re: basic VRP min/max range overflow question
• 2005-06-20 22:20 Re: basic VRP min/max range overflow question
• 2005-06-22 23:40 dead label use?
• 2005-06-24 00:12 defaults.h silliness
• 2005-06-28 21:59 Re: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC)
• 2005-06-30 22:15 mirror health

Miles Bader

• 2005-06-02 05:56 Re: reload question
• 2005-06-09 01:45 combine register note problem with multi-word values

Milind Katikar

• 2005-06-06 12:13 increase in code size with gcc3.2
• 2005-06-07 06:11 Re: increase in code size with gcc3.2

Mirza

• 2005-06-16 08:30 Re: Porposal: Floating-Point Options
• 2005-06-16 12:26 Re: Porposal: Floating-Point Options
• 2005-06-28 13:58 G++ and ISO C++

mohit . sharma

• 2005-06-15 05:11 req. help on merging instructions

Morten Welinder

• 2005-06-27 14:39 Re: Do C++ signed types have modulo semantics?
• 2005-06-28 16:59 Re: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC)

Mostafa Hagog

• 2005-06-02 13:09 Re: SMS in gcc4.0
• 2005-06-02 13:41 Re: SMS in gcc4.0
• 2005-06-30 14:20 Re: Scheduler questions (related to PR17808)

Mws

• 2005-06-08 17:03 Re: GCC 4.01 RC1 Available

N V Krishna

• 2005-06-27 15:48 Newbie question: Offset for a pseudo.

Nathan Sidwell

• 2005-06-09 08:23 Re: Any docs about gcov impl change from 3.3 to 3.4
• 2005-06-10 14:29 Re: Question about new warning system
• 2005-06-13 08:17 Re: In current gcc trunk: warning: dereferencing type-punned pointerwill break strict-aliasing rules
• 2005-06-18 13:10 Re: Your rtti.c changes broke some obj-c++ tests
• 2005-06-18 13:23 Re: Your rtti.c changes broke some obj-c++ tests
• 2005-06-26 21:54 attributes and templates
• 2005-06-27 12:18 Re: [RFC] gcov tool, comparing coverage across platforms
• 2005-06-27 13:02 Re: Do C++ signed types have modulo semantics?
• 2005-06-27 14:36 Re: Do C++ signed types have modulo semantics?
• 2005-06-28 13:29 Re: Do C++ signed types have modulo semantics?
• 2005-06-28 14:05 Re: Do C++ signed types have modulo semantics?
• 2005-06-28 15:49 Re: Do C++ signed types have modulo semantics?

Nathanael Nerode

• 2005-06-05 12:55 Re: [RFC] type safe trees
• 2005-06-05 15:37 Killing fixproto (possible target obsoletion)
• 2005-06-05 16:41 Proposed obsoletions
• 2005-06-06 10:01 Re: Proposed obsoletions
• 2005-06-06 11:35 Re: Proposed obsoletions
• 2005-06-07 23:09 Re: Proposed obsoletions

Neo Jia

• 2005-06-25 21:32 How to build GCC 3.2.2 on Fedora Core 3 with AMD64?

Nicholas Nethercote

• 2005-06-29 14:21 Re: Do CO++ signed types have modulo semantics?
• 2005-06-29 19:13 Re: Do C++ signed types have modulo semantics?

Nick Burrett

• 2005-06-08 10:04 tree-ssa-address ICE

nico

• 2005-06-22 12:47 add sourcefiles to gcc
• 2005-06-23 08:10 Re: add sourcefiles to gcc
• 2005-06-28 14:11 Some basic/beginner questions

Nix

• 2005-06-03 09:56 Re: duplicate -lgcc --as-needed -lgcc_s --no-as-needed

nkavv

• 2005-06-06 23:38 Value range propagation pass in 4.0.1 RC1 (or not)
• 2005-06-06 23:44 VRP in release version of GCC
• 2005-06-07 08:41 Re: Value range propagation pass in 4.0.1 RC1 (or not)

Olivier Galibert

• 2005-06-28 14:24 Re: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC)
• 2005-06-28 14:42 Re: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC)
• 2005-06-28 14:52 Re: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC)
• 2005-06-28 17:18 Re: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC)
• 2005-06-28 17:23 Re: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC)
• 2005-06-28 18:02 Re: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC)
• 2005-06-28 18:28 Re: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC)
• 2005-06-28 19:10 Re: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC)
• 2005-06-28 19:17 Re: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC)
• 2005-06-28 21:50 Re: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC)
• 2005-06-29 18:37 Re: The utility of standard's semantics for overflow

Olivier Hainque

• 2005-06-10 14:30 rationale for bss patterns in default_section_type_flags ?

Paolo Bonzini

• 2005-06-04 13:05 Re: RFC: Strategy for cc0 -> CCmode conversion for the AVR target.
• 2005-06-07 07:44 Re: Making GCC faster
• 2005-06-15 11:59 Re: Expanding an ADDSI3 into 2 x ADDHI3 does not work
• 2005-06-17 07:03 Re: basic VRP min/max range overflow question
• 2005-06-17 12:09 Re: basic VRP min/max range overflow question
• 2005-06-17 22:09 Re: basic VRP min/max range overflow question
• 2005-06-22 13:25 CFT: toplevel bootstrap (stage 2 project)
• 2005-06-23 07:27 Re: toplevel bootstrap (stage 2 project)

Paolo Carlini

• 2005-06-18 22:39 Re: GCC 4.0.1 RC2
• 2005-06-19 13:04 Bugzilla queries extremely slow
• 2005-06-19 13:06 Re: Libstdc++ versioning issues
• 2005-06-19 13:07 Re: Bugzilla queries extremely slow
• 2005-06-19 13:40 Re: Bugzilla queries extremely slow
• 2005-06-19 15:48 Re: Libstdc++ versioning issues
• 2005-06-19 20:30 Re: Libstdc++ versioning issues

Pat Haugen

• 2005-06-09 19:43 Can't bootstrap mainline on powerpc64-linux
• 2005-06-09 21:20 Fw: Can't bootstrap mainline on powerpc64-linux
• 2005-06-13 19:06 [PATCH] Change bb-reorder.c to use succ block frequency

Patrick McFarland

• 2005-06-16 12:42 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-18 07:09 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-24 05:53 gcc developers, donate money to help fight cancer!

Paul Brook

• 2005-06-30 20:25 Re: Ada is broken in a clean directory

Paul Koning

• 2005-06-06 14:46 Re: Proposed obsoletions
• 2005-06-08 13:38 Re: Proposed obsoletions
• 2005-06-27 14:47 Re: Do C++ signed types have modulo semantics?
• 2005-06-28 12:16 Re: Do C++ signed types have modulo semantics?
• 2005-06-28 20:18 Re: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC)
• 2005-06-28 21:27 Re: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC)
• 2005-06-29 15:01 Re: Do CO++ signed types have modulo semantics?

Paul Schlie

• 2005-06-03 14:21 Re: Ada front-end depends on signed overflow
• 2005-06-03 15:35 Re: Ada front-end depends on signed overflow
• 2005-06-03 17:03 Re: Ada front-end depends on signed overflow
• 2005-06-06 11:36 Re: Ada front-end depends on signed overflow
• 2005-06-06 16:06 Re: Ada front-end depends on signed overflow
• 2005-06-07 01:53 Re: Ada front-end depends on signed overflow
• 2005-06-07 13:31 Re: Ada front-end depends on signed overflow
• 2005-06-07 15:19 Re: Ada front-end depends on signed overflow
• 2005-06-08 13:39 Re: Ada front-end depends on signed overflow
• 2005-06-08 13:49 Re: Ada front-end depends on signed overflow
• 2005-06-08 14:53 Re: Ada front-end depends on signed overflow
• 2005-06-08 17:13 Re: Ada front-end depends on signed overflow
• 2005-06-08 17:45 Re: Ada front-end depends on signed overflow
• 2005-06-08 18:16 Re: Ada front-end depends on signed overflow
• 2005-06-09 09:44 Re: Ada front-end depends on signed overflow
• 2005-06-17 04:28 basic VRP min/max range overflow question
• 2005-06-17 12:00 Re: basic VRP min/max range overflow question
• 2005-06-17 18:29 Re: basic VRP min/max range overflow question
• 2005-06-18 00:20 Re: basic VRP min/max range overflow question
• 2005-06-18 00:59 Re: basic VRP min/max range overflow question
• 2005-06-18 14:15 Re: basic VRP min/max range overflow question
• 2005-06-18 17:44 Re: basic VRP min/max range overflow question
• 2005-06-18 18:05 Re: basic VRP min/max range overflow question
• 2005-06-18 18:50 Re: basic VRP min/max range overflow question
• 2005-06-18 19:16 Re: basic VRP min/max range overflow question
• 2005-06-19 18:23 Re: basic VRP min/max range overflow question
• 2005-06-20 05:55 Re: basic VRP min/max range overflow question
• 2005-06-20 11:04 Re: basic VRP min/max range overflow question
• 2005-06-20 11:14 Re: basic VRP min/max range overflow question
• 2005-06-20 11:26 Re: basic VRP min/max range overflow question
• 2005-06-20 12:08 Re: basic VRP min/max range overflow question
• 2005-06-20 12:09 Re: basic VRP min/max range overflow question
• 2005-06-20 13:01 Re: basic VRP min/max range overflow question
• 2005-06-20 13:09 Re: basic VRP min/max range overflow question
• 2005-06-20 18:01 Re: basic VRP min/max range overflow question
• 2005-06-28 17:41 Re: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC)
• 2005-06-29 01:33 Re: Do CO++ signed types have modulo semantics?
• 2005-06-29 07:40 Re: Do CO++ signed types have modulo semantics?
• 2005-06-29 14:59 Re: Do CO++ signed types have modulo semantics?
• 2005-06-30 19:15 Should GCC publish a general rule/warning due to it's defaultpresumption of undefined signed integer overflow semantics?
• 2005-06-30 20:08 Re: Should GCC publish a general rule/warning due to it's defaultpresumption of undefined signed integer overflow semantics?

Paul Thomas

• 2005-06-20 17:11 Re: Cygwin build failure

Per Bothner

• 2005-06-11 00:52 Re: Question about new warning system

Perret Yannick

• 2005-06-02 07:01 Changes in 'finstrument-functions' option

Peter Barada

• 2005-06-16 15:30 problemns confgire/build gcc/libstdc++ for ColdFire v4e

Peter O'Gorman

• 2005-06-02 02:02 Re: Mac OS X Panther to Tiger Build Changes for GCC 3.3 and 3.4
• 2005-06-02 04:12 Re: Mac OS X Panther to Tiger Build Changes for GCC 3.3 and 3.4

Peter S. Mazinger

• 2005-06-02 12:00 duplicate -lgcc --as-needed -lgcc_s --no-as-needed
• 2005-06-02 12:47 Re: duplicate -lgcc --as-needed -lgcc_s --no-as-needed

Prafulla Shukla

• 2005-06-03 06:34 Please help ...
• 2005-06-03 07:04 RE: Please help ...

R Hill

• 2005-06-06 08:33 Re: Tracking down gcc-4.0 performance regressions
• 2005-06-10 05:26 Re: A Suggestion for Release Testing
• 2005-06-15 03:49 Re: GCC 4.0.1 Status (2005-06-13)
• 2005-06-15 04:20 Re: Porposal: Floating-Point Options

Rafael Ávila de Espíndola

• 2005-06-14 03:11 Re: a "hello world" frontend

Rafael Ãvila de EspÃndola

• 2005-06-12 16:02 a "hello world" frontend

Rainer Orth

• 2005-06-06 19:45 gccbug submissions seem to be silently ignored
• 2005-06-06 20:18 Re: gccbug submissions seem to be silently ignored

Ranjit Mathew

• 2005-06-01 06:34 Re: Google Summer of Code
• 2005-06-15 11:36 Re: Visual C++ style inline asms
• 2005-06-17 05:57 Bootstrap Failure (i686-pc-linux-gnu, --with-arch=pentium4)
• 2005-06-17 13:11 Re: Bootstrap Failure (i686-pc-linux-gnu, --with-arch=pentium4)
• 2005-06-20 06:30 Re: Error building 4.0.1-RC2
• 2005-06-24 10:10 Re: Cross compiler

ransom

• 2005-06-23 18:41 [RFC] gcov tool, comparing coverage across platforms

Rasmussen, David Ravn

• 2005-06-07 11:21 OCODE Backend

Raymond Toy

• 2005-06-02 01:57 Re: [Fwd: Uninitialized stack gaps and conservative garbage collection]

RefuX Zanzeebarr

• 2005-06-13 03:13 cni-3.txt

Richard Earnshaw

• 2005-06-07 16:12 Re: ARM and __attribute__ long_call error
• 2005-06-08 10:28 Re: ARM and __attribute__ long_call error
• 2005-06-08 10:58 Re: ARM and __attribute__ long_call error
• 2005-06-28 09:48 Re: No tail call optimization in Thumb mode?
• 2005-06-30 09:32 Re: Scheduler questions (related to PR17808)
• 2005-06-30 10:53 Re: Scheduler questions (related to PR17808)

Richard Guenther

• 2005-06-01 21:29 Bogous trees in ivopts again!
• 2005-06-02 08:05 Re: Bogous trees in ivopts again!
• 2005-06-02 08:14 Re: Bogous trees in ivopts again!
• 2005-06-02 09:21 Lowering of types?
• 2005-06-02 18:46 Re: Lowering of types?
• 2005-06-03 21:41 Java bootstrap fails compiling libjava
• 2005-06-05 12:36 Re: Java bootstrap fails compiling libjava
• 2005-06-06 10:33 Re: Ada front-end depends on signed overflow
• 2005-06-06 11:39 Re: Tracking down gcc-4.0 performance regressions
• 2005-06-06 12:15 Re: Ada front-end depends on signed overflow
• 2005-06-08 16:37 What to do with (known) ABI mismatches during compilation
• 2005-06-12 13:40 Re: Big differences on SpecFP results for gcc and icc
• 2005-06-14 17:07 Re: Fixing Bugs (Was: A Suggestion for Release Testing)
• 2005-06-15 15:57 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-15 17:14 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-21 16:18 Re: -floop-optimize2

Richard Henderson

• 2005-06-02 18:07 Re: Lowering of types?
• 2005-06-02 19:07 Re: Lowering of types?
• 2005-06-06 21:14 Re: Proposed obsoletions
• 2005-06-08 18:16 Re: What to do with (known) ABI mismatches during compilation
• 2005-06-08 22:00 Re: vector alignment question
• 2005-06-10 20:31 Re: How to check for MMX registers in function call?
• 2005-06-10 20:35 Re: position of section() attribute question
• 2005-06-13 17:51 Re: Problem with recompute_tree_invarant_for_addr_expr
• 2005-06-13 19:57 Re: PATCH: Explicitly pass --64 to assembler on AMD64 targets
• 2005-06-13 19:59 Re: [PATCH] Change bb-reorder.c to use succ block frequency
• 2005-06-13 20:07 Re: PATCH: Explicitly pass --64 to assembler on AMD64 targets
• 2005-06-14 00:36 Re: Problem with recompute_tree_invarant_for_addr_expr
• 2005-06-14 05:55 Re: PATCH: Explicitly pass --64 to assembler on AMD64 targets
• 2005-06-15 05:08 Re: Visual C++ style inline asms
• 2005-06-15 05:11 Re: Bug in transparent union handling?
• 2005-06-15 15:45 Re: Bug in transparent union handling?
• 2005-06-19 16:50 Re: towards reduction part 3/n: what does vec lower pass do to vector shifts?
• 2005-06-19 17:33 Re: towards reduction part 3/n: what does vec lower pass do to vector shifts?
• 2005-06-19 22:13 Re: towards reduction part 3/n: what does vec lower pass do to vector shifts?
• 2005-06-27 01:56 Re: Confusing code in regrename.c
• 2005-06-27 19:56 Re: [RFH] - Less than optimal code compiling 252.eon -O2 for x86
• 2005-06-29 09:04 Re: GCC-4.1.0 size optimization bug for MIPS architecture...
• 2005-06-29 23:55 Re: PARM_DECL of DECL_SIZE 0, but TYPE_SIZE of 96 bits
• 2005-06-30 04:35 [C++] Re: PARM_DECL of DECL_SIZE 0, but TYPE_SIZE of 96 bits

Richard Kenner

• 2005-06-27 20:48 Re: Q about Ada and value ranges in types
• 2005-06-28 02:28 Re: Q about Ada and value ranges in types
• 2005-06-29 21:42 Question on tree-ssa-loop-ivopts.c:constant_multiple_of
• 2005-06-30 16:28 Re: Question on tree-ssa-loop-ivopts.c:constant_multiple_of
• 2005-06-30 17:51 PR 21963 & 22212
• 2005-06-30 22:16 Problem with tree-ssa-loop-ivopts.c:get_computation-cost

Richard Sandiford

• 2005-06-02 10:38 Re: Problem with scan-tree-dump-times in dg.exp
• 2005-06-06 10:06 Re: Follow up on simulators, documentation, etc.
• 2005-06-11 09:36 Re: GCC 4.01 RC1 Available
• 2005-06-15 05:47 Re: About macro: SYMBOL_REF_SMALL_P

Robert Bernecky

• 2005-06-10 13:34 Re: GCC question

Robert Dewar

• 2005-06-03 20:54 Re: Is it possible to catch overflow in long long multiply ?
• 2005-06-03 21:26 Re: Ada front-end depends on signed overflow
• 2005-06-04 04:21 Re: Ada front-end depends on signed overflow
• 2005-06-05 12:50 Re: Ada front-end depends on signed overflow
• 2005-06-05 14:13 Re: Ada front-end depends on signed overflow
• 2005-06-06 12:25 Re: Ada front-end depends on signed overflow
• 2005-06-06 22:57 Re: Ada front-end depends on signed overflow
• 2005-06-06 23:04 Re: Will Apple still support GCC development?
• 2005-06-06 23:13 Re: Will Apple still support GCC development?
• 2005-06-06 23:23 Re: What is wrong with Bugzilla? [Was: Re: GCC and Floating-Point]
• 2005-06-06 23:31 Re: Ada front-end depends on signed overflow
• 2005-06-07 07:16 Re: Ada front-end depends on signed overflow
• 2005-06-07 08:57 Re: Ada front-end depends on signed overflow
• 2005-06-07 21:50 Re: Ada front-end depends on signed overflow
• 2005-06-07 22:03 Re: Ada front-end depends on signed overflow
• 2005-06-08 13:55 Re: Ada front-end depends on signed overflow
• 2005-06-08 13:58 Re: Ada front-end depends on signed overflow
• 2005-06-08 14:16 Re: Ada front-end depends on signed overflow
• 2005-06-12 09:46 Re: Big differences on SpecFP results for gcc and icc
• 2005-06-13 23:40 Re: strange double comparison results with -O[12] on x86(-32)
• 2005-06-13 23:41 Re: strange double comparison results with -O[12] on x86(-32)
• 2005-06-14 14:53 Re: Porposal: Floating-Point Options
• 2005-06-14 15:13 Re: Fixing Bugs (Was: A Suggestion for Release Testing)
• 2005-06-14 15:25 Re: Fixing Bugs (Was: A Suggestion for Release Testing)
• 2005-06-14 21:22 Re: Porposal: Floating-Point Options
• 2005-06-14 21:23 Re: Porposal: Floating-Point Options
• 2005-06-14 21:30 Re: Fixing Bugs (Was: A Suggestion for Release Testing)
• 2005-06-15 11:09 Re: Fixing Bugs (Was: A Suggestion for Release Testing)
• 2005-06-15 11:11 Re: Fixing Bugs (Was: A Suggestion for Release Testing)
• 2005-06-15 11:13 Re: Fixing Bugs (Was: A Suggestion for Release Testing)
• 2005-06-16 03:13 Re: Fixing Bugs (Was: A Suggestion for Release Testing)
• 2005-06-16 11:52 Re: Porposal: Floating-Point Options
• 2005-06-16 15:07 Re: Fixing Bugs (Was: A Suggestion for Release Testing)
• 2005-06-16 16:12 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-16 21:54 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-18 02:02 Re: basic VRP min/max range overflow question
• 2005-06-18 12:39 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-18 12:43 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-18 12:48 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-18 13:07 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-18 13:09 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-18 13:12 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-18 13:15 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-18 13:22 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-18 20:45 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-18 20:55 Re: basic VRP min/max range overflow question
• 2005-06-18 21:08 Re: basic VRP min/max range overflow question
• 2005-06-18 21:26 Re: basic VRP min/max range overflow question
• 2005-06-18 21:37 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-18 22:01 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-19 01:02 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-19 10:49 Re: basic VRP min/max range overflow question
• 2005-06-20 02:44 Re: basic VRP min/max range overflow question
• 2005-06-20 10:43 Re: basic VRP min/max range overflow question
• 2005-06-20 10:54 Re: basic VRP min/max range overflow question
• 2005-06-20 11:32 Re: basic VRP min/max range overflow question
• 2005-06-20 11:34 Re: basic VRP min/max range overflow question
• 2005-06-20 12:39 Re: basic VRP min/max range overflow question
• 2005-06-20 12:46 Re: basic VRP min/max range overflow question
• 2005-06-20 12:59 Re: basic VRP min/max range overflow question
• 2005-06-20 13:14 Re: basic VRP min/max range overflow question
• 2005-06-20 13:17 Re: basic VRP min/max range overflow question
• 2005-06-21 15:21 Re: basic VRP min/max range overflow question
• 2005-06-24 15:40 Re: Suggestion for simple feature - "beep" on finish.
• 2005-06-28 09:18 Re: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC)
• 2005-06-28 09:49 Re: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC)
• 2005-06-28 10:08 Re: Do C++ signed types have modulo semantics?
• 2005-06-28 12:07 Re: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC)
• 2005-06-28 12:08 Re: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC)
• 2005-06-28 12:57 Re: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC)
• 2005-06-28 14:33 Re: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC)
• 2005-06-28 15:01 Re: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC)
• 2005-06-28 18:50 Re: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC)
• 2005-06-28 18:52 Re: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC)
• 2005-06-28 18:53 Re: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC)
• 2005-06-28 19:17 Re: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC)
• 2005-06-28 19:20 Re: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC)
• 2005-06-28 19:21 Re: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC)
• 2005-06-28 19:32 Re: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC)
• 2005-06-28 20:24 Re: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC)
• 2005-06-28 20:31 Re: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC)
• 2005-06-28 20:37 Re: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC)
• 2005-06-28 20:59 Re: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC)
• 2005-06-28 21:57 Re: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC)
• 2005-06-28 21:59 Re: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC)
• 2005-06-28 22:19 Re: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC)
• 2005-06-29 00:27 Re: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC)
• 2005-06-29 00:48 Re: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC)
• 2005-06-29 08:42 Re: The utility of standard's semantics for overflow
• 2005-06-29 09:18 Re: The utility of standard's semantics for overflow
• 2005-06-29 12:14 Re: The utility of standard's semantics for overflow
• 2005-06-29 13:35 Re: The utility of standard's semantics for overflow
• 2005-06-29 18:45 Re: Do C++ signed types have modulo semantics?

Roberto Bagnara

• 2005-06-15 14:36 Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-16 17:25 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters

Russell Shaw

• 2005-06-14 17:25 Re: Porposal: Floating-Point Options
• 2005-06-14 17:56 Re: Porposal: Floating-Point Options
• 2005-06-15 02:49 Re: Porposal: Floating-Point Options
• 2005-06-30 02:21 Re: Statement expression with function-call variable lifetime

Sam Lauber

• 2005-06-06 17:46 Making GCC faster
• 2005-06-06 21:56 Re: ld: common symbols not allowed with MH_DYLIB outputformat with the -multi_module option
• 2005-06-06 21:57 Re: ld: common symbols not allowed with MH_DYLIB outputformat with the -multi_module option
• 2005-06-07 00:16 Re: ld: common symbols not allowed with MH_DYLIB output
• 2005-06-07 00:24 Re: Will Apple still support GCC development?
• 2005-06-10 23:16 Re: ld: common symbols not allowed with MH_DYLIB outputformat with the -multi_module option
• 2005-06-13 19:19 Re: ld: common symbols not allowed with MH_DYLIB outputformat with the -multi_module option
• 2005-06-13 19:35 Re: RFA: Integrate ABI testsuite in GCC
• 2005-06-15 16:09 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-25 06:58 RSS feed for webpage?

Samuel Smythe

• 2005-06-06 19:17 Will Apple still support GCC development?

sandeep nadkarni

• 2005-06-01 11:22 help needed

Sanjiv Kumar Gupta

• 2005-06-17 12:55 Re: GCC 3.3.1 -O2 problem with sqrt.c

Saurabh Verma

• 2005-06-21 18:38 Bugzilla entries for arc-elf32 target

Scott Robert Ladd

• 2005-06-06 12:35 Re: Tracking down gcc-4.0 performance regressions
• 2005-06-06 19:27 Re: Will Apple still support GCC development?
• 2005-06-06 22:26 Re: Will Apple still support GCC development?
• 2005-06-09 20:43 A Suggestion for Release Testing
• 2005-06-09 20:46 Floating-Point, Round 2
• 2005-06-10 02:40 Re: A Suggestion for Release Testing
• 2005-06-10 02:47 Re: A Suggestion for Release Testing
• 2005-06-12 14:13 Re: Big differences on SpecFP results for gcc and icc
• 2005-06-12 22:54 Re: A Suggestion for Release Testing
• 2005-06-13 16:39 Re: Big differences on SpecFP results for gcc and icc
• 2005-06-13 16:50 Re: GCC 4.0.1 Status (2005-06-13)
• 2005-06-14 14:16 Fixing Bugs (Was: A Suggestion for Release Testing)
• 2005-06-14 14:34 Porposal: Floating-Point Options
• 2005-06-14 14:36 Re: Fixing Bugs (Was: A Suggestion for Release Testing)
• 2005-06-14 14:52 Re: Fixing Bugs (Was: A Suggestion for Release Testing)
• 2005-06-14 14:54 Re: Fixing Bugs (Was: A Suggestion for Release Testing)
• 2005-06-14 15:37 Re: Fixing Bugs (Was: A Suggestion for Release Testing)
• 2005-06-14 15:55 Re: Fixing Bugs (Was: A Suggestion for Release Testing)
• 2005-06-14 16:56 Re: Fixing Bugs (Was: A Suggestion for Release Testing)
• 2005-06-14 17:38 Re: Porposal: Floating-Point Options
• 2005-06-14 17:45 Re: Fixing Bugs (Was: A Suggestion for Release Testing)
• 2005-06-14 20:12 Re: Fixing Bugs (Was: A Suggestion for Release Testing)
• 2005-06-14 22:17 Re: Fixing Bugs (Was: A Suggestion for Release Testing)
• 2005-06-15 02:10 Re: Fixing Bugs (Was: A Suggestion for Release Testing)
• 2005-06-15 11:52 Re: Porposal: Floating-Point Options
• 2005-06-15 15:29 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-15 16:14 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-15 16:39 Re: Fixing Bugs (Was: A Suggestion for Release Testing)
• 2005-06-15 17:00 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-15 17:25 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-15 23:41 Re: Porposal: Floating-Point Options
• 2005-06-16 14:15 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-16 14:31 Re: Fixing Bugs (Was: A Suggestion for Release Testing)
• 2005-06-16 14:37 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-16 14:40 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-16 14:52 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-16 15:00 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-16 15:12 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-16 15:16 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-16 15:22 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-20 14:25 Re: How to replace -O1 with corresponding -f's?
• 2005-06-21 16:10 -floop-optimize2
• 2005-06-21 16:30 Re: -floop-optimize2
• 2005-06-21 16:32 Re: -floop-optimize2
• 2005-06-22 18:28 Re: -floop-optimize2
• 2005-06-28 12:50 Re: GCC 4.0.1 Status (2005-06-27)
• 2005-06-29 03:13 Re: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC)

Sebastian Pop

• 2005-06-13 18:29 Re: Big differences on SpecFP results for gcc and icc
• 2005-06-20 13:22 Re: basic VRP min/max range overflow question

Segher Boessenkool

• 2005-06-06 08:37 Re: Ada front-end depends on signed overflow
• 2005-06-06 11:28 Re: Ada front-end depends on signed overflow

Sergei Organov

• 2005-06-17 14:14 PowerPC small data sections.
• 2005-06-20 10:32 Re: PowerPC small data sections.
• 2005-06-20 13:40 How to replace -O1 with corresponding -f's?
• 2005-06-20 14:28 Re: How to replace -O1 with corresponding -f's?
• 2005-06-20 14:55 Re: How to replace -O1 with corresponding -f's?
• 2005-06-20 15:04 Re: How to replace -O1 with corresponding -f's?
• 2005-06-20 15:29 Re: How to replace -O1 with corresponding -f's?
• 2005-06-20 15:58 Re: How to replace -O1 with corresponding -f's?
• 2005-06-20 17:18 Re: How to replace -O1 with corresponding -f's?
• 2005-06-21 12:49 Re: How to replace -O1 with corresponding -f's?
• 2005-06-24 16:09 Re: How to replace -O1 with corresponding -f's?

Shaun Jackman

• 2005-06-29 17:34 Statement expression with function-call variable lifetime
• 2005-06-29 21:49 Re: Statement expression with function-call variable lifetime
• 2005-06-30 06:08 Re: Statement expression with function-call variable lifetime

Shelly Adhikari

• 2005-06-22 17:58 gcc template error?
• 2005-06-22 19:41 Re: gcc template error?

sjhill

• 2005-06-17 12:26 Re: Major regression in 4.1.

Stefano Curtarolo, Ph.D.

• 2005-06-14 19:51 Build success for gcc 3.4.4 on alphaev68-dec-osf5.1 (CompaqTru64UNIX)

Steve Ellcey

• 2005-06-08 19:50 vector alignment question
• 2005-06-08 22:22 Re: vector alignment question

Steve Kargl

• 2005-06-01 00:24 Re: ERROR in the gfortran testsuite
• 2005-06-17 04:38 Major regression in 4.1.
• 2005-06-17 06:30 Re: Regressions

Steven Bosscher

• 2005-06-01 14:35 Re: SMS in gcc4.0
• 2005-06-02 13:14 Re: SMS in gcc4.0
• 2005-06-03 08:52 Re: sizeof(int) in testsuite
• 2005-06-04 13:54 Re: CVS locked?
• 2005-06-04 16:07 A renewed look at GCC's performance from rebuild_jump_labels's view
• 2005-06-05 17:21 Re: GCC 4.0.1 Status (2005-06-05)
• 2005-06-05 17:37 Re: GCC 4.0.1 Status (2005-06-05)
• 2005-06-06 19:38 Re: Will Apple still support GCC development?
• 2005-06-06 23:28 Re: Will Apple still support GCC development?
• 2005-06-06 23:50 Re: VRP in release version of GCC
• 2005-06-08 10:19 Re: tree-ssa-address ICE
• 2005-06-08 21:08 [wwwdocs] IEEE 754r
• 2005-06-12 19:26 Re: Big differences on SpecFP results for gcc and icc
• 2005-06-15 16:32 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-15 22:19 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-15 22:56 Re: Visual C++ style inline asms
• 2005-06-16 12:25 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-16 14:45 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-18 11:34 Fortran left broken for a couple of days now
• 2005-06-18 11:36 Re: Regressions
• 2005-06-19 11:16 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-20 08:13 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-21 16:17 Re: -floop-optimize2
• 2005-06-25 00:06 Re: [RFH] - Less than optimal code compiling 252.eon -O2 for x86
• 2005-06-26 15:27 Confusing code in regrename.c
• 2005-06-28 06:55 Re: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC)
• 2005-06-28 11:19 Re: Do C++ signed types have modulo semantics?
• 2005-06-28 12:09 Re: Do C++ signed types have modulo semantics?
• 2005-06-28 12:30 Re: Do C++ signed types have modulo semantics?
• 2005-06-28 12:38 Re: Do C++ signed types have modulo semantics?
• 2005-06-29 16:46 Re: Do C++ signed types have modulo semantics?
• 2005-06-29 18:32 Re: Do C++ signed types have modulo semantics?
• 2005-06-29 22:46 Scheduler questions (related to PR17808)
• 2005-06-30 10:22 Re: Scheduler questions (related to PR17808)
• 2005-06-30 11:57 Re: Scheduler questions (related to PR17808)
• 2005-06-30 16:47 Re: Scheduler questions (related to PR17808)
• 2005-06-30 16:55 Re: [RFH] - Less than optimal code compiling 252.eon -O2 for x86
• 2005-06-30 19:47 Re: [RFH] - Less than optimal code compiling 252.eon -O2 for x86
• 2005-06-30 20:29 Re: Scheduler questions (related to PR17808)
• 2005-06-30 21:07 Re: Scheduler questions (related to PR17808)
• 2005-06-30 23:26 Re: Scheduler questions (related to PR17808)
• 2005-06-30 23:29 Re: Scheduler questions (related to PR17808)

Steven J. Hill

• 2005-06-19 03:48 Re: some compile problem about gcc-2.95.3
• 2005-06-29 04:59 GCC-4.1.0 size optimization bug for MIPS architecture...
• 2005-06-29 12:44 Re: GCC-4.1.0 size optimization bug for MIPS architecture...

Sylvain Pion

• 2005-06-18 11:11 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters

Theodore Papadopoulo

• 2005-06-28 17:46 Re: Do C++ signed types have modulo semantics?
• 2005-06-29 09:47 Re: The utility of standard's semantics for overflow

Thomas Brinker

• 2005-06-16 16:34 build fails for 1st pass gcc 3.4.4 target=m68k-elfhost=build=x86_64

Thomas Immich

• 2005-06-22 13:48 Getting the byte offset of a member variable pointer type

Thomas Koenig

• 2005-06-04 13:50 CVS locked?

Timothy J. Wood

• 2005-06-15 02:45 Re: Fixing Bugs (Was: A Suggestion for Release Testing)
• 2005-06-21 16:49 Re: Problem implementing faults in Objective-C

Tobias . Schlueter

• 2005-06-21 14:33 Re: How to write testcase with two warnings on one line?

Tom Marshall

• 2005-06-23 15:39 does friend qualify as a forward decl?

Tom Tromey

• 2005-06-05 17:33 Re: Java bootstrap fails compiling libjava

Tommy Vercetti

• 2005-06-18 22:24 c/c++ validator
• 2005-06-18 22:38 Re: c/c++ validator
• 2005-06-19 01:44 Re: c/c++ validator
• 2005-06-19 20:58 Re: c/c++ validator
• 2005-06-20 20:58 Re: c/c++ validator

Toon Moene

• 2005-06-06 21:07 Re: Will Apple still support GCC development?
• 2005-06-07 18:34 Re: Will Apple still support GCC development?
• 2005-06-07 20:19 Re: Will Apple still support GCC development?
• 2005-06-18 11:47 Re: basic VRP min/max range overflow question
• 2005-06-18 11:47 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-18 13:04 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-18 13:18 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-28 19:44 Re: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC)
• 2005-06-30 08:02 moene.indiv.nluug.nl is down and out ...

Tristan Wibberley

• 2005-06-18 22:45 Re: basic VRP min/max range overflow question

Ulrich Weigand

• 2005-06-02 17:00 Edges, predictions, and GC crashes ...
• 2005-06-02 20:50 Re: Edges, predictions, and GC crashes ...
• 2005-06-04 08:44 Re: Edges, predictions, and GC crashes ...
• 2005-06-09 15:01 Re: GCC 4.01 RC1 Available
• 2005-06-18 22:01 Re: GCC 4.0.1 RC2
• 2005-06-28 12:03 Re: Do C++ signed types have modulo semantics?
• 2005-06-28 18:38 Bootstrap failure -- verify_ssa failed
• 2005-06-30 15:51 Re: Bootstrap failure -- verify_ssa failed

Uros Bizjak

• 2005-06-10 08:39 How to check for MMX registers in function call?
• 2005-06-12 09:19 Big differences on SpecFP results for gcc and icc
• 2005-06-15 06:23 Re: req. help on merging instructions

Vasanth

• 2005-06-13 05:23 Software pipelining capabilities
• 2005-06-21 06:38 Re: Software pipelining capabilities

Vincent Lefevre

• 2005-06-01 00:23 Re: What is wrong with Bugzilla? [Was: Re: GCC and Floating-Point]
• 2005-06-01 07:21 Re: What is wrong with Bugzilla? [Was: Re: GCC and Floating-Point]
• 2005-06-09 07:44 Re: What is wrong with Bugzilla? [Was: Re: GCC and Floating-Point]
• 2005-06-13 14:47 Re: strange double comparison results with -O[12] on x86(-32)
• 2005-06-14 15:15 Re: Porposal: Floating-Point Options
• 2005-06-14 15:29 Re: Porposal: Floating-Point Options
• 2005-06-14 17:57 Re: Porposal: Floating-Point Options
• 2005-06-15 11:09 Re: Porposal: Floating-Point Options
• 2005-06-15 13:15 Bug related to floating-point traps?
• 2005-06-15 14:40 Re: Bug related to floating-point traps?
• 2005-06-15 15:46 Re: strange double comparison results with -O[12] on x86(-32)
• 2005-06-15 15:49 Re: strange double comparison results with -O[12] on x86(-32)
• 2005-06-15 22:15 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-16 12:03 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-16 12:09 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-16 16:00 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-16 16:04 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-16 18:53 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-16 18:59 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-16 19:08 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-18 06:52 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-19 08:35 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-19 08:50 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-19 08:55 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-19 09:04 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-19 09:15 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-19 09:25 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-19 10:54 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-19 10:56 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-19 11:11 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-19 15:18 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-19 15:40 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-19 15:53 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-19 15:59 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters
• 2005-06-19 17:14 Re: Reporting bugs: there is nothing to gain in frustrating reporters

Virender Kashyap

• 2005-06-11 19:40 Help ! Memory allocating problems
• 2005-06-22 21:36 spec benchmark testing

Vladimir Makarov

• 2005-06-29 18:01 Re: Pro64-based GPLed compiler
• 2005-06-30 13:50 Re: Scheduler questions (related to PR17808)
• 2005-06-30 22:23 Re: Pro64-based GPLed compiler
• 2005-06-30 23:06 Re: Scheduler questions (related to PR17808)

Volker Reichelt

• 2005-06-15 08:23 GCC 4.0.1 Status (2005-06-13)
• 2005-06-17 12:02 Re: Bootstrap Failure (i686-pc-linux-gnu, --with-arch=pentium4)

wangxiuli

• 2005-06-28 00:43 errors when compiling gcc-3.4.4 and gcc-4.0.0 on i386 freebsd -5.2.1.
• 2005-06-28 00:43 some errors compiling gcc-3.4.4 and gcc-4.0.0 on i386 freebsd -5.2.

Warren_Baird

• 2005-06-10 20:29 Problems with collect2 on hpux
• 2005-06-14 19:22 Re: Problems with collect2 on hpux

William Beebe

• 2005-06-09 11:14 GCC 4.0.1 RC1 successful build

Wyss Daniel

• 2005-06-09 12:23 INPUT for broken name-lookup in gcc4.0.0

Zack Weinberg

• 2005-06-10 07:33 Re: extern const and all that
• 2005-06-14 02:17 Re: PATCH: Explicitly pass --64 to assembler on AMD64 targets
• 2005-06-14 06:43 Re: PATCH: Explicitly pass --64 to assembler on AMD64 targets
• 2005-06-22 19:29 Re: How to replace -O1 with corresponding -f's?
• 2005-06-23 15:58 Re: Forward: gcc-4.0.1-b20050607.de.po [REJECTED]
• 2005-06-23 18:42 Re: Changelog question for the FSF address change
• 2005-06-28 00:49 Re: some errors compiling gcc-3.4.4 and gcc-4.0.0 on i386 freebsd -5.2.
• 2005-06-29 07:08 Re: A question about a possible build problem.

Zdenek Dvorak

• 2005-06-08 14:37 Re: tree-ssa-address ICE
• 2005-06-13 17:39 Problem with recompute_tree_invarant_for_addr_expr
• 2005-06-13 18:04 Re: Problem with recompute_tree_invarant_for_addr_expr
• 2005-06-13 20:54 Re: Problem with recompute_tree_invarant_for_addr_expr
• 2005-06-14 07:55 Re: Problem with recompute_tree_invarant_for_addr_expr
• 2005-06-22 17:41 Re: -floop-optimize2
• 2005-06-23 23:08 Re: -fprofile-arcs changes the structure of basic blocks
• 2005-06-30 15:13 Re: Question on tree-ssa-loop-ivopts.c:constant_multiple_of

Ziemowit Laski

• 2005-06-07 07:07 Re: Failures in tests for obj-c++....
• 2005-06-10 05:12 Re: obj-c++ on sparc-linux: objc runtime: cannot find class Derived etc...

zouqiong

• 2005-06-19 02:36 Re: some question about gc
• 2005-06-19 02:36 some compile problem about gcc-2.95.3

Indexes:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Site Nav:	[Browse other archives for this mailing list] [Browse other mailing lists at this site]
Search: Limit to: This time period only This mailing list only All mailing lists Entire site (no limit)