public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "ro at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug lto/47334] g++.dg/torture/pr31863.C -O2 -flto FAILs without visibility
Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2011 12:58:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <bug-47334-4-1KBCFM6VDc@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bug-47334-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47334
Rainer Orth <ro at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed| |2011.03.23 12:15:19
CC| |dnovillo at google dot com,
| |rguenther at suse dot de
Target Milestone|--- |4.7.0
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #1 from Rainer Orth <ro at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-03-23 12:15:19 UTC ---
While I'm considering how to apply the prunes from lto.exp (lto_prune_warns) to
tests not yet using lto.exp, I've got a more fundamental question: what's the
point of trying to use visibility support on targets that don't support that
and
later pruning the resulting warning? It seems far more sensible to me not to
try
this in the first place and thus avoid the resulting mess.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-03-23 12:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-01-17 18:13 [Bug lto/47334] New: " ro at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-03-23 12:58 ` ro at gcc dot gnu.org [this message]
2011-03-23 13:02 ` [Bug lto/47334] " rguenther at suse dot de
2011-04-28 16:27 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2013-11-27 13:20 ` ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE
2021-12-24 8:36 ` [Bug middle-end/47334] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-12-26 1:52 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-12-29 19:27 ` [Bug testsuite/47334] " fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-01-06 9:17 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-01-06 9:35 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=bug-47334-4-1KBCFM6VDc@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ \
--to=gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).