Closed GoogleCodeExporter closed 9 years ago
Gentoo bug is https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=503484 .
Original comment by nheghath...@gmail.com
on 5 Mar 2014 at 9:32
Wow. I'm, uh, pretty sure it's a gcc bug. If this makes it into gcc 4.9.0
release it'll be unfortunate. I'll take a look.
Original comment by arseny.k...@gmail.com
on 5 Mar 2014 at 4:02
Thank you.
Please let me know when you will need a case in GCC Bugzilla to be created.
I will open it if you will like it and link this bug report with your findings
to it.
I will build current trunk now and test compilation with it.
Best regards, David.
Original comment by nheghath...@gmail.com
on 5 Mar 2014 at 4:37
I tried building gcc from svn trunk and could not reproduce the problem:
zeux@zeux-laptop ~/gcc-svn $ svn info | grep Revision
Revision: 208347
zeux@zeux-laptop ~/gcc-svn $ g++ -v
Using built-in specs.
COLLECT_GCC=g++
COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/usr/local/libexec/gcc/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/4.9.0/lto-wr
apper
Target: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
Configured with: ./configure --disable-multilib
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.9.0 20140305 (experimental) (GCC)
zeux@zeux-laptop ~/gcc-svn $ g++ -Dpugixml_EXPORTS -DNDEBUG -O2 -ggdb -pipe
-march=native -mtune=native -mno-3dnow -mno-sse4.2 -mno-avx -fPIC -c
/home/zeux/pugixml/src/pugixml.cpp zeux@zeux-laptop ~/gcc-svn $
Can you confirm that latest gcc from trunk builds pugixml fine?
Original comment by arseny.k...@gmail.com
on 5 Mar 2014 at 5:48
I am building it now. Will confirm in the evening (CET). Thank you.
Original comment by nheghath...@gmail.com
on 5 Mar 2014 at 5:51
Ah!
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60379
This was fixed in gcc r208247 :)
Original comment by arseny.k...@gmail.com
on 5 Mar 2014 at 5:52
Blupf! :D
I even not tried to check GCC Bugzila before opening this report here.
I am sorry.
Thank you.
Original comment by nheghath...@gmail.com
on 5 Mar 2014 at 5:54
I tried to look for the specific error message in bugzilla but I picked 'open'
bugs by accident I think.
Thank you for the report, it's good to know everything is fixed in gcc already.
Original comment by arseny.k...@gmail.com
on 5 Mar 2014 at 5:56
Original issue reported on code.google.com by
nheghath...@gmail.com
on 5 Mar 2014 at 9:30Attachments: