https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118055
--- Comment #11 from Hans-Peter Nilsson <hp at gcc dot gnu.org> --- (In reply to Jeffrey A. Law from comment #10) > Feel free to make the obvious change next time ;-) Thanks... without building it, I couldn't be sure that was actually the right number. And, I thought that was a good enough excuse to call you guys to it. :) > I suspect there's other secondary/tertiary targets that need a similar > change. Absolutely. But with no-one posting test-results for them since they started to fail, I guess there's a matching disinterest in adjusting test-cases.
