-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi folks,
for gcc-4.0.2-20050917 all acats tests failed.
for gcc-4.0.1 it was 546 unexpected failures, 1774 expected passes.
for gcc-4.1-20050917 I got a build failure while building gnattools:
../../xgcc -B../../ -c -g -O2 -W -Wall -Wwrite-strings
Rainer Emrich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> for gcc-4.0.2-20050917 all acats tests failed.
>
> for gcc-4.0.1 it was 546 unexpected failures, 1774 expected passes.
for some reason, the acats tests didn't complete for me in gcc 4.0.2
20050817: I haven't yet investigated why, but the 1327 tests tha
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I used gcc-4.0.1 for bootstrapping:
Compiler version: 4.0.1
Platform: mips-sgi-irix6.5
configure flags:
- --prefix=/SCRATCH/gcc-build/IRIX64/mips-sgi-irix6.5/install
- --with-gnu-as
- --with-as=/SCRATCH/gcc-build/IRIX64/mips-sgi-irix6.5/install/bin/as
Rainer Emrich writes:
> Native ld is version 7.2.1. If I remember right, I wasn't able to build
> any version of the 4.x series. Always the same failure as described
> below. Segfault in build/gengtype.
I'm using ld 7.3 (or 7.4.3m) without problems. I suppose you should
upgrade to 7.3 at least a
==GNAT BUG DETECTED==+
| 4.1.0 20050928 (experimental) (sparc64-unknown-linux-gnu) GCC error: |
| in build_int_cst_wide, at tree.c:795 |
| Error detected at make.adb:7224:23 |
| Please su
Hi all,
Here are some responses to the particular questions that were raised.
I officially volunteer to maintain the picoChip port.
While the port doesn't currently use DejaGNU, I will fix this.
Consequently, I will be able to feed the results back to the test
results mailing list. I've bough
I notice that the following testcase:
int x[4];
void f1 (long long n) { while (n-- != 0) x[n] = 1; }
void f2 (long long n) { while (n-- != 0) x[n] = 1; }
void f3 (long long n) { while (n-- != 0) x[n] = 1; }
when compiled with optimisation enabled on i386-linux-gnu, causes us to
go
On 9/28/05, Christian Joensson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This might be related to bubblestrap so if I get no comments, I'll
> restart with a clean bootstrap...
This might also be related to http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24053
--
Cheers,
/ChJ
On 9/27/05, Mark Mitchell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Now that Benjamin and Eric have fixed the Solaris issues in libstdc++
> (yay!), I know of no reason not to spin a release. I'm going to take a
> final pass through the open PRs and look for show-stoppers. Is anyone
> aware of regressions from
Hello,
> There don't seem to be many comments explaining why we're doing
> what we're doing here, so I'm not sure whether this was the intended
> behaviour or not. Do we really want to kick out existing DECL_RTLs,
> or is there simply a missing !DECL_RTL_SET_P in the DECL_P condition:
I think th
hi,
i had a query regarding testcase gcc.c-torture/execute/960521-1.c [Link
below]. The testcase does the following:
i) mallocs two integer arrays a and b of size n each
ii) *b=0 and increment b
{lets call the new b as bnew, and the old b as bold, so
Appendix A of the OpenMP standard includes quite a few number of example
OpenMP programs. They are small and execute fast enough to be a good
addition to GCC's testsuite, but I don't know whether it would be
kosher for us to add them to GCC.
Any opinions? Should I ask the FSF directly? I gu
On 9/28/05, Christian Joensson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 9/27/05, Mark Mitchell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Now that Benjamin and Eric have fixed the Solaris issues in libstdc++
> > (yay!), I know of no reason not to spin a release. I'm going to take a
> > final pass through the open PRs
Saurabh Verma <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> i had a query regarding testcase gcc.c-torture/execute/960521-1.c [Link
> below]. The testcase does the following:
> i) mallocs two integer arrays a and b of size n each
>ii) *b=0 and increment b
> {lets call the new
I'm sorry, but as this is only a general contact address, I cannot
properly answer technical questions such as yours. The best I can do is
refer you to the GCC Manual (http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/) and
Frequently Asked Questions (http://gcc.gnu.org/faq.html). If neither of
those provide an answ
Zero ACATS fail on three platforms:
x86-linux
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2005-09/msg01292.html
x86_64-linux
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2005-09/msg01293.html
s390-linux
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2005-09/msg01257.html
Other platforms with one or few ACATS failur
Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
On Sun, 4 Sep 2005, Peter O'Gorman wrote:
| We currently perform the following sequence of commands as part of the
| installation (-m 444 being the default on current FreeBSD systems).
I can not see where freebsd could be getting a -m 444 from. The libraries
are always ins
GCC 4.0.2 has been released; the GCC 4.0 branch is open under the normal
branch rules: fixes for regressions only.
Here are the wwwdocs patches I checked in when creating the new release.
Although I still consider the 4.0 branch open, I am not going to focus
on creating a 4.0.3 release until the
GCC 4.0.2 has been released.
This release is a minor release, containing primarily fixes for
regressions in GCC 4.0.1 releative to previous releases.
http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-4.0/changes.html#4.0.2
This release is available from the FTP servers listed here:
http://www.gnu.org/order/ftp.html
The
19 matches
Mail list logo
