https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68867
--- Comment #18 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> --- (In reply to Bill Schmidt from comment #16) > Hm, but comment #8 from PR24685 indicates that this is clearly a regression. > At that time Andrew Pinski asserted that this failure was restricted to > Darwin, and powerpc*-linux didn't fail the test. That is because at the time (2006) powerpc*-linux* did not use 128bit long double (double double); things changed around 2008 time frame. So my comment applies at the time I wrote it but the powerpc*-linux* targets changed after that point.
