Hi David,
> I've rebased and squashed the analyzer patch kit and squashed patch 2
> of the hash_table fix into it, and re-tested it successfully, so I've
> pushed it to master (as 757bf1dff5e8cee34c0a75d06140ca972bfecfa7).
>
> I'm going to work through the various followup patches I had on my
> branch and re-test and push to master those that seem appropriate.
I'm seeing quite a number of failures on Solaris (both sparc and x86),
but also some on 32-bit Linux/x86:
Running target unix/-m32
+FAIL: gcc.dg/analyzer/data-model-1.c (test for warnings, line 610)
+FAIL: gcc.dg/analyzer/data-model-1.c (test for warnings, line 611)
+FAIL: gcc.dg/analyzer/data-model-1.c (test for warnings, line 615)
+FAIL: gcc.dg/analyzer/data-model-1.c (test for warnings, line 616)
+FAIL: gcc.dg/analyzer/data-model-1.c (test for warnings, line 657)
+FAIL: gcc.dg/analyzer/data-model-1.c (test for warnings, line 658)
+FAIL: gcc.dg/analyzer/data-model-1.c (test for warnings, line 662)
+FAIL: gcc.dg/analyzer/data-model-1.c (test for warnings, line 663)
+FAIL: gcc.dg/analyzer/data-model-1.c (test for warnings, line 705)
+FAIL: gcc.dg/analyzer/data-model-1.c (test for warnings, line 706)
+FAIL: gcc.dg/analyzer/data-model-1.c (test for warnings, line 710)
+FAIL: gcc.dg/analyzer/data-model-1.c (test for warnings, line 711)
+FAIL: gcc.dg/analyzer/data-model-1.c (test for warnings, line 753)
+FAIL: gcc.dg/analyzer/data-model-1.c (test for warnings, line 754)
+FAIL: gcc.dg/analyzer/data-model-1.c (test for warnings, line 758)
+FAIL: gcc.dg/analyzer/data-model-1.c (test for warnings, line 759)
+FAIL: gcc.dg/analyzer/data-model-1.c (test for excess errors)
I'll file PRs for the Solaris ones once I get to it.
Wasn't analyzer supposed to be off by default, though?
Rainer
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rainer Orth, Center for Biotechnology, Bielefeld University
