On Sun, Apr 5, 2009 at 2:25 AM, Laurent GUERBY <laur...@guerby.net> wrote: > Hi, > > On sparc-linux gcc54 I get at rev 145425: > > /home/guerby/build/./prev-gcc/xgcc -B/home/guerby/build/./prev-gcc/ > -B/n/54/guerby/install-trunk/sparc64-unknown-linux-gnu/bin/ -c -g -O2 > -DIN_GCC -W -Wall -Wwrite-strings -Wstrict-prototypes -Wmissing-p\ > rototypes -Wcast-qual -Wold-style-definition -Wc++-compat > -Wmissing-format-attribute -pedantic -Wno-long-long -Wno-variadic-macros > -Wno-overlength-strings -Werror -fno-common -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -DGENERATOR_FI\ > LE -I. -Ibuild -I../../trunk/gcc -I../../trunk/gcc/build > -I../../trunk/gcc/../include -I../../trunk/gcc/../libcpp/include > -I/opt/cfarm/mpfr-2.3.2/include -I../../trunk/gcc/../libdecnumber > -I../../trunk/gcc/\ > ../libdecnumber/dpd -I../libdecnumber -o build/genattrtab.o > ../../trunk/gcc/genattrtab.c > cc1: warnings being treated as errors > ../../trunk/gcc/genattrtab.c: In function 'attr_rtx': > ../../trunk/gcc/genattrtab.c:478: error: 'va_arg_tmp.68' may be used > uninitialized in this function > ../../trunk/gcc/genattrtab.c:478: note: 'va_arg_tmp.68' was declared here > ../../trunk/gcc/genattrtab.c:506: error: 'va_arg_tmp.71' may be used > uninitialized in this function > ../../trunk/gcc/genattrtab.c:506: note: 'va_arg_tmp.71' was declared here > make[3]: *** [build/genattrtab.o] Error 1 > make[3]: Leaving directory `/home/guerby/build/gcc' > make[2]: *** [all-stage2-gcc] Error 2 > make[2]: Leaving directory `/home/guerby/build' > make[1]: *** [stage2-bubble] Error 2 > make[1]: Leaving directory `/home/guerby/build' > make: *** [bootstrap] Error 2 > > Both warnings are on the same type of code: > > HOST_WIDE_INT arg0 = va_arg (p, HOST_WIDE_INT); > > va_arg (p, HOST_WIDE_INT) > > It was working at rev 145310, lots of change so hard to guess which > one caused the failure. > > I'm thinking of changing my auto tester to report a broken bootstrap > (the first time a bootstrap fails), is there a normalized way to > report such failures to gcc-testresults@ or g...@? >
I report it to gcc-regress...@. H.J.
