http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52823
Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution| |WONTFIX
--- Comment #1 from Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org> 2012-04-01
23:00:07 UTC ---
> AFAICT the test passes at r185912 on s390-ibm-linux-gnu default (see
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2012-03/msg03204.html), but fails at
> r185969 (see http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2012-03/msg03354.html) as
> well as on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu (see
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2012-03/msg03405.html).
It probably fails everywhere, this is known, no point in opening a PR for such
a benign regression during stage #1.
> Note that gnat.dg/return3.adb fails on s390-ibm-linux-gnu default and
> x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu:
>
> FAIL: gnat.dg/return3.adb scan-assembler loc 1 6
>
> I did not checked if a pr has already been filled for it or not. If not, since
> I don't see it on darwin, I'll let a linux user fill it.
Likewise, let's avoid cluttering up the database for this.
