Re: [patch] Adjust target selectors for some libstdc++ tests

2014-05-23 Thread Jonathan Wakely
On 23/05/14 12:49 +0200, Rainer Orth wrote: Any reason to list dragonfly twice? Oops, no - that's due to me reordering commits with rebase so the sed command added it to some files I'd already added it to. Fixed with the attached patch, thanks. commit 12ad71abb1122314f38e98d382c86eacd3cbb022 A

Re: [patch] Adjust target selectors for some libstdc++ tests

2014-05-23 Thread Rainer Orth
Jonathan Wakely writes: > diff --git a/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/30_threads/call_once/60497.cc > b/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/30_threads/call_once/60497.cc > index b058204..a82b88f 100644 > --- a/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/30_threads/call_once/60497.cc > +++ b/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/30_threads/call_once/60

[patch] Adjust target selectors for some libstdc++ tests

2014-05-23 Thread Jonathan Wakely
This marks a test that is xfail for darwin as also xfail for dragonfly. I'm surprised it fails on darwin and dragonfly but not freebsd, but Gerald's testresults don't show it failing. Also fix a couple of tests which were missing target selectors on the { dg-do compile } directive, so the tests r