[Bug libgcj/55637] FAIL: sourcelocation output - source compiled test

2016-09-30 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55637

Andrew Pinski  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |RESOLVED
 Resolution|--- |WONTFIX

--- Comment #21 from Andrew Pinski  ---
Closing as won't fix as libgcj (and the java front-end) has been removed from
the trunk.

[Bug libgcj/55637] FAIL: sourcelocation output - source compiled test

2015-06-26 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55637

Andrew Pinski  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Target Milestone|4.9.4   |---


[Bug libgcj/55637] FAIL: sourcelocation output - source compiled test

2015-06-26 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55637

Jakub Jelinek  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Target Milestone|4.9.3   |4.9.4


[Bug libgcj/55637] FAIL: sourcelocation output - source compiled test

2015-06-26 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55637

--- Comment #20 from Jakub Jelinek  ---
GCC 4.9.3 has been released.


[Bug libgcj/55637] FAIL: sourcelocation output - source compiled test

2014-10-30 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55637

Jakub Jelinek  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Target Milestone|4.9.2   |4.9.3

--- Comment #19 from Jakub Jelinek  ---
GCC 4.9.2 has been released.


[Bug libgcj/55637] FAIL: sourcelocation output - source compiled test

2014-07-16 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55637

Jakub Jelinek  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Target Milestone|4.9.1   |4.9.2

--- Comment #18 from Jakub Jelinek  ---
GCC 4.9.1 has been released.


[Bug libgcj/55637] FAIL: sourcelocation output - source compiled test

2014-04-22 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55637

Jakub Jelinek  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Target Milestone|4.9.0   |4.9.1

--- Comment #17 from Jakub Jelinek  ---
GCC 4.9.0 has been released


[Bug libgcj/55637] FAIL: sourcelocation output - source compiled test

2014-04-01 Thread dominiq at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55637

--- Comment #16 from dominiq at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: dominiq
Date: Tue Apr  1 10:19:06 2014
New Revision: 208983

URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=208983&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2014-04-01  Dominique d'Humieres 
Rainer Orth  

PR libgcj/55637
* testsuite/libjava.lang/sourcelocation.xfail: New file.


Added:
branches/gcc-4_8-branch/libjava/testsuite/libjava.lang/sourcelocation.xfail
Modified:
branches/gcc-4_8-branch/libjava/ChangeLog


[Bug libgcj/55637] FAIL: sourcelocation output - source compiled test

2014-02-20 Thread ro at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55637

--- Comment #15 from Rainer Orth  ---
Author: ro
Date: Thu Feb 20 14:04:53 2014
New Revision: 207951

URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=207951&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
XFAIL sourcelocation (PR libgcj/55637)

PR libgcj/55637
* testsuite/libjava.lang/sourcelocation.xfail: New file.

Added:
trunk/libjava/testsuite/libjava.lang/sourcelocation.xfail


[Bug libgcj/55637] FAIL: sourcelocation output - source compiled test

2014-02-20 Thread ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55637

--- Comment #14 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE  ---
> --- Comment #13 from Dominique d'Humieres  ---
>> What should we do about this test?  Having it fail everywhere a current
>> binutils
>> version is used causes lots of noise in testsuite results.
>
> Since nobody cared to fix the tests since more than one year, IMO the answer 
> is
> obvious: remove it.

I've now posted a patch to xfail it instead:

http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-02/msg01218.html

Rainer


[Bug libgcj/55637] FAIL: sourcelocation output - source compiled test

2014-02-07 Thread dominiq at lps dot ens.fr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55637

--- Comment #13 from Dominique d'Humieres  ---
> What should we do about this test?  Having it fail everywhere a current 
> binutils
> version is used causes lots of noise in testsuite results.

Since nobody cared to fix the tests since more than one year, IMO the answer is
obvious: remove it.


[Bug libgcj/55637] FAIL: sourcelocation output - source compiled test

2014-02-07 Thread ro at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55637

Rainer Orth  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Target Milestone|--- |4.9.0

--- Comment #12 from Rainer Orth  ---
What should we do about this test?  Having it fail everywhere a current
binutils
version is used causes lots of noise in testsuite results.

  Rainer


[Bug libgcj/55637] FAIL: sourcelocation output - source compiled test

2013-09-04 Thread mark at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55637

--- Comment #11 from Mark Wielaard  ---
It seems somewhat related to the binutils version.
The results form comment #10 are with binutils-2.20.51.0.2-5.36.el6.x86_64
If I build and put current binutils trunk on the path the results change (for
the worse):

PASS: sourcelocation compilation from source
PASS: sourcelocation execution - source compiled test
FAIL: sourcelocation output - source compiled test
PASS: sourcelocation -findirect-dispatch compilation from source
PASS: sourcelocation -findirect-dispatch execution - source compiled test
FAIL: sourcelocation -findirect-dispatch output - source compiled test
PASS: sourcelocation -O3 compilation from source
PASS: sourcelocation -O3 execution - source compiled test
FAIL: sourcelocation -O3 output - source compiled test
PASS: sourcelocation -O3 -findirect-dispatch compilation from source
PASS: sourcelocation -O3 -findirect-dispatch execution - source compiled test
FAIL: sourcelocation -O3 -findirect-dispatch output - source compiled test

Now all output tests fail... hohum.


[Bug libgcj/55637] FAIL: sourcelocation output - source compiled test

2013-09-04 Thread mark at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55637

--- Comment #10 from Mark Wielaard  ---
O wait, it is more complicated than that. My "by hand" tests were using the
interpreter. But there are multiple sourcelocation tests:

PASS: sourcelocation compilation from source
PASS: sourcelocation execution - source compiled test
FAIL: sourcelocation output - source compiled test
PASS: sourcelocation -findirect-dispatch compilation from source
PASS: sourcelocation -findirect-dispatch execution - source compiled test
FAIL: sourcelocation -findirect-dispatch output - source compiled test
PASS: sourcelocation -O3 compilation from source
PASS: sourcelocation -O3 execution - source compiled test
FAIL: sourcelocation -O3 output - source compiled test
PASS: sourcelocation -O3 -findirect-dispatch compilation from source
PASS: sourcelocation -O3 -findirect-dispatch execution - source compiled test
PASS: sourcelocation -O3 -findirect-dispatch output - source compiled test

So sometimes the output does PASS.


[Bug libgcj/55637] FAIL: sourcelocation output - source compiled test

2013-09-04 Thread mark at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55637

--- Comment #9 from Mark Wielaard  ---
I assume this is some weirdness in the testsuite. It does indeed fail for me in
a make check, but seems to work just fine when ran by hand.


[Bug libgcj/55637] FAIL: sourcelocation output - source compiled test

2013-09-04 Thread mark at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55637

--- Comment #8 from Mark Wielaard  ---
What happens when you run it by hand?

$ gij -cp ./libjava/testsuite/libjava.lang/sourcelocation.jar sourcelocation
10
13
15

-1 indicates "something went wrong", which is indeed not very helpful.


[Bug libgcj/55637] FAIL: sourcelocation output - source compiled test

2013-09-04 Thread doko at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55637

--- Comment #7 from Matthias Klose  ---
it prints
-1
-1
-1


[Bug libgcj/55637] FAIL: sourcelocation output - source compiled test

2013-09-04 Thread mark at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55637

Mark Wielaard  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||mark at gcc dot gnu.org

--- Comment #6 from Mark Wielaard  ---
Does the .log file give any more hints?
Or could someone that sees the test failing run it by hand and show the output?


[Bug libgcj/55637] FAIL: sourcelocation output - source compiled test

2013-09-03 Thread ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55637

--- Comment #5 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE  ---
> --- Comment #4 from Matthias Klose  ---
> Mark's patch is in binutils 2.23.x, but the testcase is still failing on 
> x86_64
> linux.

Right, same problem with binutils 2.23.1 addr2line on Solaris.

Rainer


[Bug libgcj/55637] FAIL: sourcelocation output - source compiled test

2013-09-03 Thread doko at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55637

Matthias Klose  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||doko at gcc dot gnu.org

--- Comment #4 from Matthias Klose  ---
Mark's patch is in binutils 2.23.x, but the testcase is still failing on x86_64
linux.


[Bug libgcj/55637] FAIL: sourcelocation output - source compiled test

2013-08-09 Thread ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55637

--- Comment #3 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE  ---
> --- Comment #2 from Dominique d'Humieres  
> 2013-01-15 18:14:17 UTC ---
> This is also seen on darwin due to
>
>To make this test pass, one need to have up-to-date addr2line installed
>to parse the dwarf4 data format.
>
> (no addr2line on darwin so the tests should be skipped, xfailed, ... on
> darwin).

This doesn't seem right: on all of Linux/x86_64, Solaris/x86, and
Solaris/SPARC with binutils 2.23.1 addr2line, the failure remains.

This is really annoying and creates testsuite noise.  We either need to
get the requirements straight and test for them in the testsuite or drop
this test.

Rainer


[Bug libgcj/55637] FAIL: sourcelocation output - source compiled test

2013-01-15 Thread dominiq at lps dot ens.fr


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55637



Dominique d'Humieres  changed:



   What|Removed |Added



 Target|hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.11   |hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.11

   |*-*-solaris2*,  |*-*-solaris2*,

   |x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu|x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu,

   ||*-*-darwin*

 CC||dehao at google dot com

   Host|hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.11,  |hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.11,

   |*-*-solaris2*,  |*-*-solaris2*,

   |x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu|x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu,

   ||*-*-darwin*

  Build|hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.11   |hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.11

   |*-*-solaris2*,  |*-*-solaris2*,

   |x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu|x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu,

   ||*-*-darwin*



--- Comment #2 from Dominique d'Humieres  2013-01-15 
18:14:17 UTC ---

This is also seen on darwin due to



   To make this test pass, one need to have up-to-date addr2line installed

   to parse the dwarf4 data format.



(no addr2line on darwin so the tests should be skipped, xfailed, ... on

darwin).



These tests also fail on linux (at least for the Intel bots: see

http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2013-01/msg01563.html).



This was discussed on the java mailing list (see

http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/java/2012-09/msg00016.html), but I don't see anything

after



http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/java/2012-09/msg00025.html


[Bug libgcj/55637] FAIL: sourcelocation output - source compiled test

2013-01-08 Thread ro at gcc dot gnu.org


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55637



Rainer Orth  changed:



   What|Removed |Added



 Target|hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.11   |hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.11

   ||*-*-solaris2*,

   ||x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu

 Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW

   Last reconfirmed||2013-01-08

 CC||ro at gcc dot gnu.org

   Host|hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.11   |hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.11,

   ||*-*-solaris2*,

   ||x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu

 Ever Confirmed|0   |1

  Build|hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.11   |hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.11

   ||*-*-solaris2*,

   ||x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu



--- Comment #1 from Rainer Orth  2013-01-08 16:15:58 UTC 
---

I'm also seeing this on *-*-solaris2* and x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu; I suppose

it happens everywhere.