On Sun, Feb 25, 2007 at 03:00:04PM -0600, Steve M. Robbins wrote: > Thanks hugely for looking into this.
> On Sun, Feb 25, 2007 at 10:36:21AM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote: > > On Sun, Feb 25, 2007 at 01:14:44AM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote: > > > Looking at the code, I gather that it's expected for this test to throw an > > > assertion, and the problem is that it blows up on the other end. Other > > > tests that use CPPUNIT_ASSERT_ASSERTION_FAIL() seem to work ok, though, so > > > it doesn't seem to be a general problem with exception handling on alpha. > Have you actually seen a test using CPPUNIT_ASSERT_ASSERTION_FAIL() > work ok? Yes, I looked for other occurrences of this in the code and tested them directly, invoking the individual tests by name from cppunittestmain. > Just in case you were mistaken about seeing CPPUNIT_ASSERT_ASSERTION_FAIL > work correctly, I'm attaching a small test case to exercise it. If it > fails to work with -O2, but does work with -O0, perhaps the assembly > might clue us in on what is being optimized away. That test case works fine when built with -O2, regardless of the options used for building cppunit. I.e., even when building cppunit itself with -O2 (and getting the testsuite failure), this test case still passes. Time allowing, I'll look into getting a minimal test case working back from the one that's known to fail. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
