On Sat, 2014-08-16 18:35:41 +0200, Manuel López-Ibáñez <lopeziba...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 16 August 2014 17:19, Manuel López-Ibáñez <lopeziba...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Actually, I just noticed I committed the wrong patch and afterwards I > > was not building Fortran. > > I spoke too fast. Although it is true I haven't build Fortran after > the patch went it, I just did and I didn't get the above errors. > > Can anyone else reproduce this? Perhaps is it a target-specific issue?
Not target-specific. Look at http://toolchain.lug-owl.de/buildbot/timeline.php?limit=4000 , it's all the config-rules.mk builds that fail. The last build that seems to be successful is http://toolchain.lug-owl.de/buildbot/show_build_details.php?id=327932, while the first failing seems to be http://toolchain.lug-owl.de/buildbot/show_build_details.php?id=327937 Build 327932's top commit is b71839120cfa70f06e5c03d7c9cbb63884a3890b (Vladimir Makarov <vmaka...@redhat.com>, config/rs6000/rs6000.c (rs6000_emit_move): Use SDmode for[...]). Build 327937' top commit is, well, your commit (Manuel López-Ibáñez <m...@gcc.gnu.org>, PR fortran/44054). The main difference between the "config-list.mk" and the "other" builds is that the others use a smaller set of languages, Fortran not being among them. I also thought about that there might have been a GCC update on the gcc{20,76} machines, but I'm 100% sure that there was no update on "pluto", which also shows failed builds since then. MfG, JBG -- Jan-Benedict Glaw jbg...@lug-owl.de +49-172-7608481 Signature of: http://catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html the second :
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
