From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 22554 invoked by alias); 12 Feb 2007 16:16:50 -0000 Received: (qmail 22462 invoked by uid 48); 12 Feb 2007 16:16:30 -0000 Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2007 16:16:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20070212161630.22461.qmail@sourceware.org> X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC References: Subject: [Bug fortran/29975] [meta-bugs] ICEs with CP2K In-Reply-To: Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org From: "fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org" Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2007-02/txt/msg01297.txt.bz2 ------- Comment #49 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-02-12 16:16 ------- (In reply to comment #48) > Currently, there is a new ICE on CP2K (see initial comment) that happens at any > optimisation level: > > > gfortran -c all_cp2k_gfortran.f90 > all_cp2k_gfortran.f90:118549: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault It compiled fine two days ago (with the patch for PR30391), I tested it myself! I'm pretty sure it's the same problem that was already reported here: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2007-02/msg00250.html Of course, a confirmation wouldn't hurt, but I don't have time right now. If you manage to confirm this, it'd be nice to send a mail to the list. > I really think CP2K should be added to some nightly > tester somewhere by gfortran developers... Well, I second that, but we first need to get it working (like, the middle-end people have to move on PR30391). -- fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |paulthomas2 at wanadoo dot | |fr Last reconfirmed|2007-01-21 16:34:55 |2007-02-12 16:16:29 date| | http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29975