Paolo Carlini writes: > Eric Botcazou wrote: > > >>hmm, I get a few libstdc++ testsuite failuers.... > >> > >>http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2005-07/msg00304.html > >> > >>other than that, looks pretty fine. > >> > >> > >Did you get them with 4.0.0 too? If no, the libstdc++ folks will have to > >say > >whether they are really regressions (the testsuite harness has changed). > > > Yes, I would definitely encourage a little more analysis. I'm rather > puzzled. We have got very nice testsuites on sparc-solaris and on > *-linux, in general, and those failures certainly are not expected. > However, missing additional details, it's very difficult to guess: can > be almost anything, from a weirdness in the installed localedata to a > defect of the testsuite harness, to a code generation bug, to a latent > bug in the generic code of the library exposed only by that target, and > only now.
I don't see these regression on Debian unstable, not exactly built from the snapshot, but from CVS at the same date. Test results at http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2005-07/msg00280.html However, there are 8 gfortran regressions, compared to 4.0.0: FAIL: gfortran.dg/f2c_2.f90 -O0 execution test FAIL: gfortran.dg/f2c_2.f90 -O1 execution test FAIL: gfortran.dg/f2c_2.f90 -O2 execution test FAIL: gfortran.dg/f2c_2.f90 -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer execution test FAIL: gfortran.dg/f2c_2.f90 -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -funroll-loops execution test FAIL: gfortran.dg/f2c_2.f90 -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -funroll-all-loops -finline-functions execution test FAIL: gfortran.dg/f2c_2.f90 -O3 -g execution test FAIL: gfortran.dg/f2c_2.f90 -Os execution test
