http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51921
--- Comment #8 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE <ro at CeBiTec dot
Uni-Bielefeld.DE> 2012-02-08 18:10:31 UTC ---
> --- Comment #7 from Richard Guenther <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> 2012-02-08
> 10:44:51 UTC ---
> Please fill out known-to-work and known-to-fail fields. Was it "working"
Done.
> in any 4.6.x release? Especially was it "working" in 4.6.0? If so regressing
> on the branch is very bad.
It was working on the 4.6 branch from 4.6.0 to 4.6.2.
> Did the revert fix any regression that was reported as a bug and has gotten
> a testcase? If not, then the proper way to address this new regression is
> to revert the revert especially as it appearantly happened during stage4(?)
You probably won't need a separate testcase since the failure of the
sparc/sol2-unwind.h code manifests itself as lots testsuite failures in
ACATS, gnat.dg, and libjava.
The only report I know of is Eric's mail about the failure on s10_72, an
ancient Solaris 10 bi-weekly beta build, something almost nobody outside
Sun/Oracle will be able to test/verify since the corresponding ISO
images are no longer available.
Rainer
