------- Comment #2 from dave at hiauly1 dot hia dot nrc dot ca 2007-07-24 15:40 ------- Subject: Re: FAIL: 23_containers/bitset/cons/16020.cc execution test
> I think there is no reason to categorize as libstdc++: almost nothing changed > in the library in that timespan (and definitely nothing related) and, AFAICS, > all the other targets are fine. Also, I would suggest adding to the report a > miminum of additional info about the failure, for the benefit of interested > people not having available an hppa-linux system. I'm forced to pick a category when reporting a bug. The bug occurred in the libstdc++ testsuite, so I picked that... Personally, I don't like having to categorize bugs on the initial report as this tends to assign responsibility. I avoid picking "target" as essentially all bugs then become the responsibility of the target maintainer. At least 90% of the time, the bug isn't in the backend but the target maintainer has to do the leg work to debug and categorize the bug. On review of the changes in the period, I agree that nothing in libstdc++ changed in the timespan. The only GCC change that might have had an effect is revision 126692. It's possible that this failure was introduced by an update to Debian libc6 version 2.6-2. That could explain why others aren't seeing this problem. I'm not seeing the failure on hpux. I'll provide more info when available. Dave -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32878
