Regression status improving -- keep it up!

We're down from 219 4.1 regressions yesterday to 208 today. That's much better than the 1-per-day progress rate over the last few weeks! If we can sustain that rate, we'll be looking good pretty quickly. -- Mark Mitchell CodeSourcery, LLC [EMAIL PROTECTED] (916) 791-8304

Support for init_priority in ARM EABI configurations

Paul, Richard -- The csl-arm-branch (and, probably, mainline) claim not to support the init_priority attribute for AAPCS targets. (I can't remember who did that; quite possibly me!) One of our customers has suggested that this is a mistake, and I tend to agree. I think the reason this isn't sup

A New Architecture

I just finish porting gcc to our new architecture: S+core Both gcc & g++ & libstdc++ are successfully build. But I have problem in testing, though I've pass lot's of informal C test patterns which my partner scratched from the internet. The GCC testing framework is so complicated t

Re: Some svn numbers

Oh, i should just point out that client side, i am using: [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/mnt/gccstuff/gcc-clean/gcc> svn --version svn, version 1.2.3 (r15833) compiled Sep 13 2005, 02:48:01 (this is the opensuse 10.0 rpm) 1.3.x should be out in the next month, and when it is, 1.1.x will be deprecated 1

Some svn numbers

So, Mike Stump said his update times with svn from toolchain.org were a little slow. I posited a few reasons why this might be, and just to publicly follow up with some numbers, here is what i get from gcc.gnu.org after remembering to convert with keyword support turned off :) These are all do-no

Re: Global variable clobbering and statics

On Tue, 2005-10-11 at 20:44 -0400, Diego Novillo wrote: > On Tuesday 11 October 2005 20:30, Daniel Berlin wrote: > > > BTW, you are also screwing up the upwards fud-chains in cases where it > > really does clobber A, since you'll get the exact same as above, and > > thus, A_1 won't be linked to th

gcc-3.4-20051011 is now available

Snapshot gcc-3.4-20051011 is now available on ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/3.4-20051011/ and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details. This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 3.4 CVS branch with the following options: -rgcc-ss-3_4-20051011 You'll

Re: FAIL: gcc.dg/sparc-frame-1.c (test for excess errors) with -m64 on sparc/sparc64 linux...

> Executing on host: /usr/local/src/trunk/objdir/gcc/xgcc > -B/usr/local/src/trunk/objdir/gcc/ > /usr/local/src/trunk/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/sparc-frame-1.c -O -g > -fno-show-column -S -m64 -o sparc-frame-1.s(timeout = 1200) > /usr/local/src/trunk/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/sparc-frame-1.c:

FAIL: gcc.dg/sparc-frame-1.c (test for excess errors) with -m64 on sparc/sparc64 linux...

Executing on host: /usr/local/src/trunk/objdir/gcc/xgcc -B/usr/local/src/trunk/objdir/gcc/ /usr/local/src/trunk/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/sparc-frame-1.c -O -g -fno-show-column -S -m64 -o sparc-frame-1.s(timeout = 1200) /usr/local/src/trunk/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/sparc-frame-1.c: In functio

Re: Speed impact of virtual inheritance

On Oct 10, 2005, at 2:25 PM, Frans Englich wrote: What makes me ask these questions, is that I have code which (according to my opinion) severely needs virtual inheritance(VI). The code VI would affect is not under my veto power, and the maintainers of that code have so far given as comment "

Re: -fprofile-arcs and gcov: data without exit()

On Tue, Oct 11, 2005 at 06:01:07PM +0100, Nathan Sidwell wrote: > Astroman (sent by Nabble.com) wrote: > > I am working on a piece of software that never exits and I am trying to > > use -fprofile-arcs and gcov to gather coverage data on it. > >The code looks like this: > >int main(){ > > whil

Re: -fprofile-arcs and gcov: data without exit()

Astroman (sent by Nabble.com) wrote: I am working on a piece of software that never exits and I am trying to use -fprofile-arcs and gcov to gather coverage data on it. The code looks like this: int main(){ while(1){ foo(); nanosleep(50); } } This is a child process that as

Re: -fprofile-arcs and gcov: data without exit()

On 10/11/05, Astroman (sent by Nabble.com) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I am working on a piece of software that never exits and I am trying to use > -fprofile-arcs and gcov to gather coverage data on it. > The code looks like this: > int main(){ >while(1){ > foo(); > nanosleep

Re: Running ranlib after installation - okay or not?

Alexandre Oliva wrote: On Sep 29, 2005, "Peter O'Gorman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I posted a patch that nobody has had time to look at for this, even if it is not acceptable (it would probably be better if it reset the permissions after calling ranlib) I'd appreciate some feedback :)

-fprofile-arcs and gcov: data without exit()

I am working on a piece of software that never exits and I am trying to use -fprofile-arcs and gcov to gather coverage data on it. The code looks like this: int main(){ while(1){ foo(); nanosleep(50); } } This is a child process that as you can see will never exit on its ow