Dalibor wrote: >Thank you, Kiyo, that's great news, since currently the two tests can be >expected to fail.
Yes, I understand that these two are expected to fail. But, then, this report introduces me one interesting (or funny) fact. Since I did not put any info for SIGNAL_ARGS for 'arm/netbsd1' (usually this should be defined in 'md.h'), no proper care for exception handling is done for this port. But, the regression test reports that exception handling works OK (at least in StackDump.out). Is it specific to arm based engine, or shall we have more regression tests to check this lazyness? Kiyo _______________________________________________ kaffe mailing list [email protected] http://kaffe.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kaffe
