On Sat, 23 Apr 2005, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote: > On Wed, 6 Apr 2005, Joseph S. Myers wrote: > > (If test results for a port are so bad that > > though sent to gcc-testresults they exceed the message size limit, and > > this remains the case for a prolonged period such as ever since 4.0 > > branched, that also indicates lack of active maintenance.) > > No, it could just as well be a problem with the library, as is > the case for libgfortran; tests still run even though it's > disabled for mmix-knuth-mmixware. (There's a PR about it > somewhere, IIRC.)
The *fortran* tests still run (and the front-end is built) although libgfortran is disabled. It seems I was mistaken about there being a PR. Hum. For cris-elf, the fortran tests just FAIL all over due to missing references to ftruncate, dup and access (not provided by newlib but apparently assumed by libgfortran). Last time I checked, there was very little maintaier interest in getting cross-building and cross-testing to work for fortran. I myself have no interest in it other than as a testbed. brgds, H-P
