From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 10065 invoked by alias); 8 Feb 2010 14:38:17 -0000 Received: (qmail 9956 invoked by uid 48); 8 Feb 2010 14:38:02 -0000 Date: Mon, 08 Feb 2010 14:38:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20100208143802.9955.qmail@sourceware.org> X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC References: Subject: [Bug fortran/41113] spurious _gfortran_internal_pack In-Reply-To: Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org From: "jv244 at cam dot ac dot uk" 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: 2010-02/txt/msg00721.txt.bz2 ------- Comment #11 from jv244 at cam dot ac dot uk 2010-02-08 14:38 ------- (In reply to comment #10) > This was followed by http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2009-12/msg00166.html I have just retested your patch on a clean tree to Dominique's testcase, but I don't get any segfault, and also valgrind finds nothing to report. Obviously that doesn't mean that the patch is right, but maybe Dominique can retest on his machine with a clean tree (or if this is only triggered by specific options let us know)? -- jv244 at cam dot ac dot uk changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |dominiq at lps dot ens dot | |fr http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41113