------- Comment #32 from howarth at nitro dot med dot uc dot edu 2010-09-01 15:18 ------- (In reply to comment #31)
> I compared revision 163733 against revision 163733 + gcc-pr45234-2.patch > with a cross compiler to x86_64-apple-darwin10.4.0. I saw no > differences in .su files for gcc.dg/stack-usage-1.c nor > gcc.target/i386/stack-usage-realign.c. Are you sure they pass > on Darwin with revision 163733? > HJ, Actually it appears that... FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/builtins/sprintf-chk.c compilation, -Os (internal compiler error) UNRESOLVED: gcc.c-torture/execute/builtins/sprintf-chk.c execution, -Os FAIL: gcc.dg/stack-usage-1.c scan-file foo\\t(256|264)\\tstatic FAIL: gcc.target/i386/stack-usage-realign.c scan-file main\\t48\\tdynamic,bounded are actually new regressions present in unpatched gcc trunk... http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2010-09/msg00042.html I will do a regression hunt later today to find out the offending commit. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36502
