On Mon, Nov 28, 2005 at 09:20:21PM +0100, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote: > Gabriel Dos Reis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > | I'm running the pre-releasing script, so a new prerelease tarball will be > | available today. > > The tarballs are available for download and testing here: > > ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/prerelease-3.4.5-20051128/
Tests (including Ada tests this time) for i686-pc-linux-gnu on RHEL 3.0 are at http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2005-11/msg01334.html They are essentially perfect (only the one known failure). I also ran tests on an x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu RHEL 3.0 box (no Ada). Here we see a number of failures: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2005-11/msg01333.html Almost all the C failures are in tests that disable themselves if NO_TRAMPOLINES is defined, so I'm assuming trampolines don't work, perhaps because of some kind of stack protection on the box I'm using. But this is similar to what I've seen before. I don't know anything about the libffi test failures. I also am running tests on an ia64 box running RHEL AW2.1 (I know, old stuff, but I don't control that box) with binutils 2.14. Tests aren't done yet (so I can't yet point to the gcc-testresults URL), but there are the following gcc failures: FAIL: gcc.dg/compat/scalar-by-value-3 c_compat_x_tst.o compile FAIL: gcc.dg/compat/scalar-return-3 c_compat_x_tst.o compile FAIL: gcc.dg/compat/struct-by-value-18 c_compat_x_tst.o compile FAIL: gcc.dg/compat/struct-by-value-7a c_compat_x_tst.o-c_compat_y_tst.o execute FAIL: gcc.dg/compat/struct-by-value-7b c_compat_x_tst.o-c_compat_y_tst.o execute FAIL: gcc.dg/20021014-1.c (test for excess errors) FAIL: gcc.dg/cleanup-10.c execution test FAIL: gcc.dg/cleanup-11.c execution test FAIL: gcc.dg/cleanup-8.c execution test FAIL: gcc.dg/cleanup-9.c execution test FAIL: gcc.dg/nest.c (test for excess errors) FAIL: gcc.dg/special/gcsec-1.c (test for excess errors) and one g++ failure: FAIL: g++.old-deja/g++.law/profile1.C (test for excess errors) The libstdc++ failures below are presumably due to a really old glibc: FAIL: 22_locale/codecvt/encoding/wchar_t/wrapped_locale.cc execution test FAIL: 22_locale/codecvt/in/wchar_t/9.cc execution test FAIL: 22_locale/codecvt/max_length/wchar_t/wrapped_locale.cc execution test FAIL: 22_locale/collate/transform/char/2.cc execution test FAIL: 22_locale/collate/transform/char/3.cc execution test FAIL: 22_locale/collate/transform/char/wrapped_env.cc execution test FAIL: 22_locale/collate/transform/char/wrapped_locale.cc execution test FAIL: 22_locale/collate/transform/wchar_t/2.cc execution test FAIL: 22_locale/collate/transform/wchar_t/3.cc execution test FAIL: 22_locale/collate/transform/wchar_t/wrapped_env.cc execution test FAIL: 22_locale/collate/transform/wchar_t/wrapped_locale.cc execution test FAIL: 22_locale/collate_byname/named_equivalence.cc execution test FAIL: 22_locale/ctype/widen/wchar_t/2.cc execution test FAIL: 22_locale/locale/cons/12438.cc execution test XPASS: 22_locale/locale/cons/12658_thread.cc execution test FAIL: 22_locale/money_put/put/char/9780-3.cc execution test XPASS: 26_numerics/c99_classification_macros_c.cc (test for excess errors) FAIL: 27_io/basic_filebuf/imbue/wchar_t/12868.cc execution test FAIL: 27_io/basic_filebuf/overflow/wchar_t/11305-1.cc execution test FAIL: 27_io/basic_filebuf/overflow/wchar_t/11305-2.cc execution test FAIL: 27_io/basic_filebuf/overflow/wchar_t/11305-3.cc execution test FAIL: 27_io/basic_filebuf/overflow/wchar_t/11305-4.cc execution test FAIL: 27_io/basic_filebuf/underflow/wchar_t/9520.cc execution test XPASS: 27_io/fpos/14320-1.cc execution test and there are 45 libffi failures.
