https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55637
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55637
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.9.3 |4.9.4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55637
Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.9.4 |---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55637
--- Comment #20 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
GCC 4.9.3 has been released.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55637
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.9.2 |4.9.3
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55637
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.9.1 |4.9.2
---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55637
Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.9.0 |4.9.1
---
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=208983root=gccview=rev
Log:
2014-04-01 Dominique d'Humieres domi...@lps.ens.fr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55637
--- Comment #14 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ro at CeBiTec dot
Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
--- Comment #13 from Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr ---
What should we do about this test? Having it fail everywhere a current
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55637
--- Comment #15 from Rainer Orth ro at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: ro
Date: Thu Feb 20 14:04:53 2014
New Revision: 207951
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=207951root=gccview=rev
Log:
XFAIL sourcelocation (PR libgcj/55637)
PR libgcj/55637
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55637
Rainer Orth ro at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.9.0
--- Comment #12
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55637
--- Comment #13 from Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr ---
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
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55637
Mark Wielaard mark at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mark at gcc dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55637
--- Comment #7 from Matthias Klose doko at gcc dot gnu.org ---
it prints
-1
-1
-1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55637
--- Comment #8 from Mark Wielaard mark at gcc dot gnu.org ---
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
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55637
--- Comment #9 from Mark Wielaard mark at gcc dot gnu.org ---
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.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55637
--- Comment #10 from Mark Wielaard mark at gcc dot gnu.org ---
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:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55637
--- Comment #11 from Mark Wielaard mark at gcc dot gnu.org ---
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
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55637
Matthias Klose doko at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||doko at gcc dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55637
--- Comment #5 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ro at CeBiTec dot
Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
--- Comment #4 from Matthias Klose doko at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Mark's patch is in binutils 2.23.x, but the testcase is still failing on
x86_64
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55637
--- Comment #3 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ro at CeBiTec dot
Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
--- Comment #2 from Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr
2013-01-15 18:14:17 UTC ---
This is also seen on darwin due to
To make this
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55637
Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.11
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55637
Rainer Orth ro at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target|hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.11
23 matches
Mail list logo
