Re: GCC 4.0.2 RC2

2005-09-19 Thread Mark Mitchell
Etienne Lorrain wrote: > Hello, > > You really do not want to get a correction for: > http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23631 > before release? I'd love to get a patch for this problem. -- but there's no readily available prospect, and this is not a regression from 4.0.x. The pri

Re: GCC 4.0.2 RC2

2005-09-19 Thread Janis Johnson
On Sun, Sep 18, 2005 at 09:41:54AM -0700, Mark Mitchell wrote: > Please test, post test results to gcc-testresults, and send me an email > pointing at the results. OK for powerpc64-unknown-linux-gnu: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2005-09/msg00942.html Janis

Re: GCC 4.0.2 RC2

2005-09-19 Thread Kaz Kojima
> Please test, post test results to gcc-testresults, and send me an email > pointing at the results. OK for sh4-unknown-linux-gnu: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2005-09/msg00902.html Regards, kaz

Re: GCC 4.0.2 RC2

2005-09-19 Thread Eric Botcazou
> I filed them as bugs, not fixed them. OK, thanks for confirming. -- Eric Botcazou

Re: GCC 4.0.2 RC2

2005-09-19 Thread Andrew Pinski
On Sep 19, 2005, at 4:21 PM, Eric Botcazou wrote: Anyways, all of the known failures with the obj-c++ with the GNU runtime have been filed and someone needs to look into them. Are you talking about these? I filed them as bugs, not fixed them. Thanks, Andrew Pinski

Re: GCC 4.0.2 RC2

2005-09-19 Thread Eric Botcazou
> Anyways, all of the known failures with the obj-c++ with the GNU > runtime have been filed and someone needs to look into them. Are you talking about these? === obj-c++ tests === Running target unix FAIL: obj-c++.dg/bitfield-1.mm (test for excess errors) FAIL: obj-c++.dg/bitfi

Re: GCC 4.0.2 RC2

2005-09-19 Thread Andrew Pinski
On Sep 19, 2005, at 3:21 PM, Mike Stump wrote: On Sep 18, 2005, at 2:43 PM, Ulrich Weigand wrote: In fact, as far as I can recall, 4.0.2 will be the first ever GCC release with zero testsuite FAILs across all languages on s390-ibm-linux ... [ rub eyes ] [ head explodes ] [ desperately tryi

Re: GCC 4.0.2 RC2

2005-09-19 Thread Eric Botcazou
> You didn't test --enable-languages=obj-c++ Yeah, it's a plot, we positively refuse to test everything Apple has *not* contributed. ;-) -- Eric Botcazou

Re: GCC 4.0.2 RC2

2005-09-19 Thread Paul Brook
> GCC 4.0.2 RC2 is now available here Sill ok on arm-none-elf: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2005-09/msg00938.html Paul

Re: GCC 4.0.2 RC2

2005-09-19 Thread Mike Stump
On Sep 18, 2005, at 2:43 PM, Ulrich Weigand wrote: In fact, as far as I can recall, 4.0.2 will be the first ever GCC release with zero testsuite FAILs across all languages on s390-ibm-linux ... [ rub eyes ] [ head explodes ] [ desperately trying to make sense of the world ] You didn't test -

Re: GCC 4.0.2 RC2

2005-09-19 Thread Eric Botcazou
> Please test, post test results to gcc-testresults, and send me an email > pointing at the results. Still OK for SPARC/Solaris: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2005-09/msg00929.html http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2005-09/msg00930.html http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2005-09/msg

Re: GCC 4.0.2 RC2

2005-09-19 Thread Richard Guenther
On 9/19/05, Paolo Bonzini <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I applied the patch by hand (not working with CVS) and it > > does _not_ solve the problem. > > > In this case, I am sorry but the probability of a fix before the release > is close to zero. The problem with 4.0 is that it behaves comple

Re: GCC 4.0.2 RC2

2005-09-19 Thread Paolo Bonzini
I applied the patch by hand (not working with CVS) and it does _not_ solve the problem. In this case, I am sorry but the probability of a fix before the release is close to zero. Paolo

Re: GCC 4.0.2 RC2

2005-09-19 Thread Etienne Lorrain
--- Paolo Bonzini <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Etienne Lorrain wrote: > > Hello, > > > > You really do not want to get a correction for: > > http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23631 > > before release? > > > > I checked again with 4.0.2 20050917, and nothing > > has changed sinc

Re: GCC 4.0.2 RC2

2005-09-19 Thread Paolo Bonzini
Etienne Lorrain wrote: Hello, You really do not want to get a correction for: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23631 before release? I checked again with 4.0.2 20050917, and nothing has changed since: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2005-09/msg00251.html Etienne, does the patch

Re: GCC 4.0.2 RC2

2005-09-19 Thread Etienne Lorrain
Hello, You really do not want to get a correction for: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23631 before release? I checked again with 4.0.2 20050917, and nothing has changed since: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2005-09/msg00251.html Etienne. _

Re: GCC 4.0.2 RC2

2005-09-18 Thread Andreas Tobler
Mark Mitchell wrote: Please test, post test results to gcc-testresults, and send me an email pointing at the results. darwin ppc should be ok. http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2005-09/msg00898.html Andreas

Re: GCC 4.0.2 RC2

2005-09-18 Thread Ulrich Weigand
Mark Mitchell wrote: > Please test, post test results to gcc-testresults, and send me an email > pointing at the results. s390(x)-ibm-linux is still fine: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2005-09/msg00883.html http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2005-09/msg00884.html In fact, as far as I

Re: GCC 4.0.2 RC2

2005-09-18 Thread Laurent GUERBY
On Sun, 2005-09-18 at 09:41 -0700, Mark Mitchell wrote: > Thanks to all who tested GCC 4.0.2 RC1. > > GCC 4.0.2 RC2 is now available here: > [...] > Please test, post test results to gcc-testresults, and send me an email > pointing at the results. Still ok for c,ada on x86 and x86_64-linux: http