Hi Bernhard,
Thanks for doing some of this tidying up. The patch is OK to commit on
both trunk and 6-branch. It might be worth going back to 5-branch as
well, if you feel up to it.
Cheers
Paul
On 18 June 2016 at 21:47, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer
wrote:
> Ping.
>
> On December 1, 2015 1:54:58 PM
On Sun, Jun 19, 2016 at 11:18:08AM +0200, Paul Richard Thomas wrote:
> Hi Bernhard,
>
> Thanks for doing some of this tidying up. The patch is OK to commit on
> both trunk and 6-branch. It might be worth going back to 5-branch as
> well, if you feel up to it.
Applied to trunk as r237580 so far.
Hi,
ping...
As this discussion did not make any progress, I just attached
the latest version of my patch with the the changes that
Vladimir proposed.
Boot-strapped and reg-tested again on x86_64-linux-gnu.
Is it OK for the trunk?
Thanks
Bernd.
On 06/10/16 16:13, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
> On 06
On Thu, 16 Jun 2016, Tom G. Christensen wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 03:53:40PM +0200, Tom G. Christensen wrote:
>> Testresults for 5.4.0:
>> i386-pc-solaris2.11 (2)
>> i386-pc-solaris2.12 (2)
>> sparc-sun-solaris2.11 (2)
>> sparc-sun-solaris2.12 (2)
>>
> Updated patch with new entries
On Jun 18, 2016, at 12:31 PM, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer
wrote:
>
> A branch with a name matching scan-assembler pattern triggers
> inappropriate FAIL.
> The patch below adds -fno-ident if a testcase contains one of
> scan-assembler, scan-assembler-not or scan-assembler-times.
Kinda gross. I'd
On Sat, Jun 18, 2016 at 9:56 AM, David Malcolm wrote:
> On Sat, 2016-06-18 at 15:06 +0200, Jan-Benedict Glaw wrote:
>> Hi David, Segher, Aldy!
>>
>> Davids new selftest code found something for the rs6000-ibm-aix4.3
>> target, maybe you're interested:
>>
>> /home/jbglaw/src/toolchain/build/./gcc/x
