From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 11674 invoked by alias); 15 Apr 2014 17:54:54 -0000 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 Received: (qmail 11634 invoked by uid 48); 15 Apr 2014 17:54:48 -0000 From: "ibronstein at klocwork dot com" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug c++/60848] New: Crash while experimenting with c++-0x initializer lists Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2014 17:54:00 -0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: new X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: c++ X-Bugzilla-Version: 4.8.1 X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: ibronstein at klocwork dot com X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: bug_id short_desc product version bug_status bug_severity priority component assigned_to reporter attachments.created Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-SW-Source: 2014-04/txt/msg01105.txt.bz2 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D60848 Bug ID: 60848 Summary: Crash while experimenting with c++-0x initializer lists Product: gcc Version: 4.8.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++ Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: ibronstein at klocwork dot com Created attachment 32604 --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=3D32604&action=3Dedit Crashing source $ g++ -c -std=3Dc++0x test03.cpp =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D test03.cpp: In function =E2=80=98void f()=E2=80=99: test03.cpp:10:13: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault foo({1, 2}); ^ 0x89ffef crash_signal ../.././gcc/toplev.c:332 0x4e97ec build_list_conv ../.././gcc/cp/call.c:790 0x4e97ec implicit_conversion ../.././gcc/cp/call.c:1705 0x4e9e5b reference_binding ../.././gcc/cp/call.c:1461 0x4e9344 implicit_conversion ../.././gcc/cp/call.c:1695 0x4ea751 add_function_candidate ../.././gcc/cp/call.c:2001 0x4e86de add_candidates ../.././gcc/cp/call.c:5033 0x4ecead perform_overload_resolution ../.././gcc/cp/call.c:3817 0x4f092a build_new_function_call(tree_node*, vec**, bool, int) ../.././gcc/cp/call.c:3894 0x59fe01 finish_call_expr(tree_node*, vec**, b= ool, bool, int) ../.././gcc/cp/semantics.c:2220 0x55e29a cp_parser_postfix_expression ../.././gcc/cp/parser.c:5855 0x56041d cp_parser_unary_expression ../.././gcc/cp/parser.c:6729 0x560f4f cp_parser_binary_expression ../.././gcc/cp/parser.c:7421 0x5613ff cp_parser_assignment_expression ../.././gcc/cp/parser.c:7657 0x562ff3 cp_parser_expression ../.././gcc/cp/parser.c:7819 0x56375c cp_parser_expression ../.././gcc/cp/parser.c:7858 0x56375c cp_parser_expression_statement ../.././gcc/cp/parser.c:9120 0x55a8e7 cp_parser_statement ../.././gcc/cp/parser.c:8972 0x55baee cp_parser_statement_seq_opt ../.././gcc/cp/parser.c:9238 0x55bc0e cp_parser_compound_statement ../.././gcc/cp/parser.c:9192 =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D >>From gcc-bugs-return-449086-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Apr 15 17:55:47 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 13000 invoked by alias); 15 Apr 2014 17:55:47 -0000 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 Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 12930 invoked by uid 48); 15 Apr 2014 17:55:41 -0000 From: "ktietz at gcc dot gnu.org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug bootstrap/60830] [4.9 Regression] ICE on bootstrapping on cygwin Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2014 17:55:00 -0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: bootstrap X-Bugzilla-Version: 4.9.0 X-Bugzilla-Keywords: build X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: ktietz at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Status: WAITING X-Bugzilla-Priority: P1 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 4.9.0 X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-SW-Source: 2014-04/txt/msg01106.txt.bz2 Content-length: 1311 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60830 --- Comment #22 from Kai Tietz --- (In reply to Denis Excoffier from comment #21) > (In reply to Kai Tietz from comment #17) > > Just as side-note, I tried to reproduce your reported issue and did a > > personal build of cygwin's gcc. It worked fine in stage2. I couldn't > > reproduce the reported ICE on stage2. Which brings me to the question if > > you are using additional patches/fixes, etc > Did you use 32bits? Did you use a recent cygwin version? There has been some > movement recently (2014-03-28) in dtors.cc, although i believe that only > 64bits is impacted. I built recent gcc 4.9 on my pre-installed cygwin 32-bit (as you did too, as logs have shown). Only difference I made was to disable multilib. And this you should do too. Additionally I built x64 version on my cygwin64 environment too. So from my point of view it isn't a gcc issue. As both targets are bootstrapping without issue for me. So, it might be an issue with recent cygwin, I can test that too. I will continue on that tomorrow as it takes me pretty long to built it native. Nevetheless I doubt that I will find different results for gcc. And if it is really dependent on cygwin-dll version, then it seems to me indeed like a cygwin-bug