From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48) id 476A3386F824; Tue, 21 Apr 2020 16:31:19 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 476A3386F824 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org; s=default; t=1587486679; bh=KxormBCxmZldM0Pg9tv0ZX3+IxLWZH/7DVz7Xos5Pls=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=IzdulE8F8snWLFa++SiM22ikz0aBObpW2lY8EW1l+T89KVUyNP7EfL4c/vRJAl6gb gXpBtv+j8I8ziZjkyNX07ISc/TcZ/7VBQUqtF4GwMHU+KkTTe2x5y5MTV8oOOXD5mF wXECi69Poae27Rbhkl3vCJa5EP91tWhqci7mMBrg= From: "jakub at gcc dot gnu.org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug libfortran/94694] [10 Regression][libgfortran] libgfortran does not compile on bare-metal aarch64-none-elf (newlib) Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2020 16:31:18 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: libfortran X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.0 X-Bugzilla-Keywords: build X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: P1 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 10.0 X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: attachments.created Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: 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-BeenThere: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gcc-bugs mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2020 16:31:19 -0000 https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D94694 --- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek --- Created attachment 48326 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=3D48326&action=3Dedit gcc10-pr94694.patch Completely untested full patch. Will try to test it on x86_64-linux where = it hopefully shouldn't change anything, but have no (easy) way to test on targ= ets where it is actually needed.=