On 21/02/2013 19:35, Anthony Green wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 2:22 PM, Dave Korn wrote:
>> Gcc-patches: Assuming AG approves, can we commit this without waiting for
>> an
>> upstream libffi release and doing a full merge? Currently GCC HEAD won't
>> build libffi (and hence libjava) without it.
>
> This patch looks fine, thanks. I don't plan to merge back into GCC
> for at least a week or two, so I think you should commit it to the GCC
> tree independently.
>
> This means that 3.0.12 is broken for Cygwin. Are you able to produce
> test results once you apply this change? I should probably issue a
> quick 3.0.13 if the results are decent.
Yes, the tests run fine (using libffi git HEAD from yesterday):
> Native configuration is i686-pc-cygwin
>
> === libffi tests ===
>
>
> Running target unix
> FAIL: libffi.call/closure_thiscall.c (test for excess errors)
> WARNING: libffi.call/closure_thiscall.c compilation failed to produce
> executable
>
> FAIL: libffi.call/closure_thiscall.c (test for excess errors)
> WARNING: libffi.call/closure_thiscall.c compilation failed to produce
> executable
>
> FAIL: libffi.call/closure_thiscall.c (test for excess errors)
> WARNING: libffi.call/closure_thiscall.c compilation failed to produce
> executable
>
> FAIL: libffi.call/closure_thiscall.c (test for excess errors)
> WARNING: libffi.call/closure_thiscall.c compilation failed to produce
> executable
>
> FAIL: libffi.call/closure_thiscall.c (test for excess errors)
> WARNING: libffi.call/closure_thiscall.c compilation failed to produce
> executable
>
>
> === libffi Summary ===
>
> # of expected passes 1924
> # of unexpected failures 5
I was using gcc-4.5.3, which is from before thiscall support was added, so
those compile failures are unremarkable and expected. Given that, we have a
clean sweep.
cheers,
DaveK
