obtained gcc-4.6.4.tar.bz2 from upstream website;upstream

verified gcc-4.6.4.tar.bz2.sig;
imported gcc-4.6.4 source tree from verified upstream tarball.

downloading a git-generated archive based on the 'upstream' tag
should provide you with a source tree that is binary identical
to the one extracted from the above tarball.

if you have obtained the source via the command 'git clone',
however, do note that line-endings of files in your working
directory might differ from line-endings of the respective
files in the upstream repository.

1 files changed, 51 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/g77/980310-7.f b/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/g77/980310-7.f
new file mode 100644
index 000000000..3cbcbe9ca
--- /dev/null
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/g77/980310-7.f
@@ -0,0 +1,51 @@
+c { dg-do compile }
+C From: "David C. Doherty" <doherty@networkcs.com>
+C Message-Id: <199711171846.MAA27947@uh.msc.edu>
+C Subject: g77: auto arrays + goto = no go
+C To: egcs-bugs@cygnus.com
+C Date: Mon, 17 Nov 1997 12:46:27 -0600 (CST)
+
+C I sent the following to fortran@gnu.ai.mit.edu, and Dave Love
+C replied that he was able to reproduce it on rs6000-aix; not on
+C others. He suggested that I send it to egcs-bugs. 
+
+C Hi - I've observed the following behavior regarding 
+C automatic arrays and gotos.  Seems similar to what I found
+C in the docs about computed gotos (but not exactly the same).
+C 
+C I suspect from the nature of the error msg that it's in the GBE.
+C 
+C I'm using egcs-971105, under linux-ppc.
+C 
+C I also observed the same in g77-0.5.19 (and gcc 2.7.2?).
+C 
+C I'd appreciate any advice on this.  thanks for the great work.
+C --
+C >cat testg77.f
+      subroutine testg77(n, a)
+c
+      implicit none
+c
+      integer n
+      real a(n)
+      real b(n)
+      integer i
+c
+      do i = 1, 10
+        if (i .gt. 4) goto 100
+        write(0, '(i2)')i
+      enddo
+c
+      goto 200
+100   continue
+200   continue
+c
+      return
+      end
+C >g77 -c testg77.f
+C testg77.f: In subroutine `testg77':
+C testg77.f:19: label `200' used before containing binding contour
+C testg77.f:18: label `100' used before containing binding contour
+C --
+C If I comment out the b(n) line or replace it with, e.g., b(10),
+C it compiles fine.