GCC 8.4 Released
The GNU Compiler Collection version 8.4 has been released. GCC 8.4 is a bug-fix release from the GCC 8 branch containing important fixes for regressions and serious bugs in GCC 8.3 with more than 209 bugs fixed since the previous release. This release is available from the FTP servers listed at: http://www.gnu.org/order/ftp.html Please do not contact me directly regarding questions or comments about this release. Instead, use the resources available from http://gcc.gnu.org. As always, a vast number of people contributed to this GCC release -- far too many to thank them individually!
GCC 8.5 Status Report (2020-03-04)
Status == GCC 8.4 has been released and the branch is again open for regression and documentation fixes. History makes us expect a GCC 8.5 release in fall of this year and it will be the last release from the GCC 8 series. Quality Data Priority # Change from last report --- --- P11 + 1 P2 259 + 1 P3 34 - 2 P4 155 P5 22 --- --- Total P1-P3 294 - 30 Total 471 Previous Report === https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2020-02/msg00212.html
Re: GCC 8.5 Status Report (2020-03-04)
On Wed, Mar 4, 2020 at 2:30 AM Jakub Jelinek wrote: > > Status > == > > GCC 8.4 has been released and the branch is again open for regression > and documentation fixes. History makes us expect a GCC 8.5 release > in fall of this year and it will be the last release from the GCC 8 > series. > > > Quality Data > > > Priority # Change from last report > --- --- > P11 + 1 > P2 259 + 1 > P3 34 - 2 > P4 155 > P5 22 > --- --- > Total P1-P3 294 - 30 > Total 471 > > > Previous Report > === > > https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2020-02/msg00212.html > I saw these new failures on Fedora 31: FAIL: 22_locale/numpunct/members/char/3.cc execution test FAIL: 22_locale/time_get/get_time/char/2.cc execution test FAIL: 22_locale/time_get/get_time/char/wrapped_env.cc execution test FAIL: 22_locale/time_get/get_time/char/wrapped_locale.cc execution test FAIL: 22_locale/time_get/get_time/wchar_t/2.cc execution test FAIL: 22_locale/time_get/get_time/wchar_t/wrapped_env.cc execution test FAIL: 22_locale/time_get/get_time/wchar_t/wrapped_locale.cc execution test Are they expected? -- H.J.
Re: GCC 8.5 Status Report (2020-03-04)
On Wed, Mar 04, 2020 at 04:52:20AM -0800, H.J. Lu wrote: > I saw these new failures on Fedora 31: > > FAIL: 22_locale/numpunct/members/char/3.cc execution test > FAIL: 22_locale/time_get/get_time/char/2.cc execution test > FAIL: 22_locale/time_get/get_time/char/wrapped_env.cc execution test > FAIL: 22_locale/time_get/get_time/char/wrapped_locale.cc execution test > FAIL: 22_locale/time_get/get_time/wchar_t/2.cc execution test > FAIL: 22_locale/time_get/get_time/wchar_t/wrapped_env.cc execution test > FAIL: 22_locale/time_get/get_time/wchar_t/wrapped_locale.cc execution test As with all 22_locale tests, if something in glibc changes (usually some locale data), some tests can fail. Though e.g. the first test hasn't really changed since late 2018, does it work on the trunk for you? E.g. for the first test, seems glibc fefa21790b5081e5d04662a240e2efd18603ef86 changed: diff --git a/localedata/locales/nl_NL b/localedata/locales/nl_NL index d0ba6c7283..20652a9939 100644 --- a/localedata/locales/nl_NL +++ b/localedata/locales/nl_NL @@ -74,7 +74,7 @@ LC_MONETARY int_curr_symbol "EUR " currency_symbol "" mon_decimal_point "," -mon_thousands_sep "" +mon_thousands_sep "." mon_grouping 3;3 positive_sign "" negative_sign "-" @@ -90,8 +90,8 @@ END LC_MONETARY LC_NUMERIC decimal_point "," -thousands_sep "" -grouping 0;0 +thousands_sep "." +grouping 3;3 END LC_NUMERIC LC_TIME The test says: // nl_NL chosen because it has no thousands separator (at this time). locale loc_it = locale(ISO_8859(15,nl_NL)); so no wonder that it FAILs if nl_NL now has thousands separator. Maybe it is time for libstdc++ testsuite to create its own artificial locales and test against them. Jakub
Re: GCC 8.5 Status Report (2020-03-04)
On Wed, Mar 4, 2020 at 5:01 AM Jakub Jelinek wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 04, 2020 at 04:52:20AM -0800, H.J. Lu wrote: > > I saw these new failures on Fedora 31: > > > > FAIL: 22_locale/numpunct/members/char/3.cc execution test > > FAIL: 22_locale/time_get/get_time/char/2.cc execution test > > FAIL: 22_locale/time_get/get_time/char/wrapped_env.cc execution test > > FAIL: 22_locale/time_get/get_time/char/wrapped_locale.cc execution test > > FAIL: 22_locale/time_get/get_time/wchar_t/2.cc execution test > > FAIL: 22_locale/time_get/get_time/wchar_t/wrapped_env.cc execution test > > FAIL: 22_locale/time_get/get_time/wchar_t/wrapped_locale.cc execution test > > As with all 22_locale tests, if something in glibc changes (usually some > locale data), some tests can fail. > Though e.g. the first test hasn't really changed since late 2018, does it > work on the trunk for you? No, they fail on all branches. > E.g. for the first test, seems glibc fefa21790b5081e5d04662a240e2efd18603ef86 > changed: > diff --git a/localedata/locales/nl_NL b/localedata/locales/nl_NL > index d0ba6c7283..20652a9939 100644 > --- a/localedata/locales/nl_NL > +++ b/localedata/locales/nl_NL > @@ -74,7 +74,7 @@ LC_MONETARY > int_curr_symbol "EUR " > currency_symbol "" > mon_decimal_point "," > -mon_thousands_sep "" > +mon_thousands_sep "." > mon_grouping 3;3 > positive_sign "" > negative_sign "-" > @@ -90,8 +90,8 @@ END LC_MONETARY > > LC_NUMERIC > decimal_point "," > -thousands_sep "" > -grouping 0;0 > +thousands_sep "." > +grouping 3;3 > END LC_NUMERIC > > LC_TIME > > The test says: > // nl_NL chosen because it has no thousands separator (at this time). > locale loc_it = locale(ISO_8859(15,nl_NL)); > so no wonder that it FAILs if nl_NL now has thousands separator. > Maybe it is time for libstdc++ testsuite to create its own artificial > locales and test against them. > > Jakub > -- H.J.
Re: GCC 8.5 Status Report (2020-03-04)
On Wed, 4 Mar 2020 at 12:53, H.J. Lu wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 4, 2020 at 2:30 AM Jakub Jelinek wrote: > > > > Status > > == > > > > GCC 8.4 has been released and the branch is again open for regression > > and documentation fixes. History makes us expect a GCC 8.5 release > > in fall of this year and it will be the last release from the GCC 8 > > series. > > > > > > Quality Data > > > > > > Priority # Change from last report > > --- --- > > P11 + 1 > > P2 259 + 1 > > P3 34 - 2 > > P4 155 > > P5 22 > > --- --- > > Total P1-P3 294 - 30 > > Total 471 > > > > > > Previous Report > > === > > > > https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2020-02/msg00212.html > > > > I saw these new failures on Fedora 31: > > FAIL: 22_locale/numpunct/members/char/3.cc execution test > FAIL: 22_locale/time_get/get_time/char/2.cc execution test > FAIL: 22_locale/time_get/get_time/char/wrapped_env.cc execution test > FAIL: 22_locale/time_get/get_time/char/wrapped_locale.cc execution test > FAIL: 22_locale/time_get/get_time/wchar_t/2.cc execution test > FAIL: 22_locale/time_get/get_time/wchar_t/wrapped_env.cc execution test > FAIL: 22_locale/time_get/get_time/wchar_t/wrapped_locale.cc execution test > > Are they expected? See https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/2020-03/msg00157.html
Re: GCC 8.5 Status Report (2020-03-04)
On Wed, 4 Mar 2020 at 13:02, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > The test says: > // nl_NL chosen because it has no thousands separator (at this time). > locale loc_it = locale(ISO_8859(15,nl_NL)); > so no wonder that it FAILs if nl_NL now has thousands separator. Drat. I thought we could rely on the Dutch to keep things simple, apparently even they want to keep changing things ;-) > Maybe it is time for libstdc++ testsuite to create its own artificial > locales and test against them. Yes, maybe. We do have a real bug here, which is that we don't support %p at all. Even if we created our own locales that have fixed formats and don't use %p, we're still be unable to deal with real locales that do use %p. Fixing all the bugs linked to https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86976 is on my TODO list for GCC 11.
construction
Hi, I would like to know if you are interested in construction contacts across USA, UK, and Canada. Our file includes businesses from many areas of the construction industry including building companies and contractors. Few are listed below. * Building Equipment Contractors * Construction Engineers and Designers * Architecture Services * Building Furnishing Contractors * Interior Designers and Decorators * Building Contractors * Utility Construction/ Utilities Industry * And More! I'd be happy to send over few sample records on your request, and set up a time to discuss in detail. Let me know if I can call to explain further Thank you, Taana Nate| Sales coordinator *If you don't wish to get messages from us answer back with "Remove"
construction
Hi, I would like to know if you are interested in construction contacts across USA, UK, and Canada. Our file includes businesses from many areas of the construction industry including building companies and contractors. Few are listed below. * Building Equipment Contractors * Construction Engineers and Designers * Architecture Services * Building Furnishing Contractors * Interior Designers and Decorators * Building Contractors * Utility Construction/ Utilities Industry * And More! I'd be happy to send over few sample records on your request, and set up a time to discuss in detail. Let me know if I can call to explain further Thank you, Taana Nate| Sales coordinator *If you don't wish to get messages from us answer back with "Remove"
