Joel Sherrill created an issue: https://gitlab.rtems.org/rtems/rtos/rtems/-/issues/5230
The following discussion from !433 should be addressed: - [ ] @chris started a [discussion](https://gitlab.rtems.org/rtems/rtos/rtems/-/merge_requests/433#note_120263 "m68k/uC5282: Disable spcxx001"): (+1 comment) >>> 1. This BSP is supported by EPICS and I suspect SLAC still has it running. I wonder if EPICS would also fail to build as it uses C++? 2. Is this only C++ test that fails? 3. I do not like the idea of suppressing a failure this way because it can get forgotten 4. If we get a clean report for GCC 14 because this test is suppressed could that trigger acceptance of GCC 14? What happens to this BSP? >>> (1) Someone will have to fix gcc, etc. to support std::atomic on Coldfire ISA A - [ ] (2) Yes. - [ ] (3) OK. - [ ] (4) I'm sorry someone is still using this BSP without making sure GCC supports the CPU fully. -- View it on GitLab: https://gitlab.rtems.org/rtems/rtos/rtems/-/issues/5230 You're receiving this email because of your account on gitlab.rtems.org.
_______________________________________________ bugs mailing list bugs@rtems.org http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/bugs
