On 2/9/25 11:34, Nathaniel Shead wrote:
On Fri, Feb 07, 2025 at 10:57:19AM +0100, Toon Moene wrote:
Compare a standard gcc build:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-testresults/2025-February/837664.html
with this one using checking=all:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-testresults/2025-February/837708.html
Other languages do not seem to be affected.
A sample:
FAIL: g++.dg/modules/xtreme-header-8.C -std=c++17 (internal compiler error:
Segmentation fault)
FAIL: g++.dg/modules/xtreme-header-8.C -std=c++17 (test for excess errors)
FAIL: g++.dg/modules/xtreme-header-8.C module-cmi xstd (gcm.cache/xstd.gcm)
FAIL: g++.dg/modules/xtreme-header-8.C -std=c++2a (internal compiler error:
Segmentation fault)
FAIL: g++.dg/modules/xtreme-header-8.C -std=c++2a (test for excess errors)
FAIL: g++.dg/modules/xtreme-header-8.C module-cmi xstd (gcm.cache/xstd.gcm)
Hope this is useful.
Kind regards,
--
Toon Moene - e-mail: t...@moene.org - phone: +31 346 214290
Saturnushof 14, 3738 XG Maartensdijk, The Netherlands
Thanks, I've reduced the issue with the modules testcases and created
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118807 for this.
I think this has worked:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-cvs/2025-February/417320.html
as shown in:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-testresults/2025-February/838151.html
Very good !
--
Toon Moene - e-mail: t...@moene.org - phone: +31 346 214290
Saturnushof 14, 3738 XG Maartensdijk, The Netherlands
