On 2/9/08 7:10 AM, Tom Browder wrote:
Guidance and approval are hereby solicited.
You don't really need approval to work on GCC. Just make sure you can
contribute. You can get guidance by posting your questions here or on IRC.
This would be a good area to clean up. Thanks for working on
Hi,
My testsuite are also bounced. Is there a problem?
H.J.
On Feb 9, 2008 6:12 AM, Jack Howarth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Is anyone else having their gcc testresults rejected by
> the mail server as containing elements that appear to be
> spam?
>Jack
>
On Fri, Feb 08, 2008 at 09:20:30PM +0100, Arnaud Charlet wrote:
> I can confirm that I had no troubles building i686-linux with latest
> sources.
>
> I suspect a miscompilation of the previous stage compiler, possibly caused
> by a bad initial compiler used to start the bootstrap, or the use of
>
Is anyone else having their gcc testresults rejected by
the mail server as containing elements that appear to be
spam?
Jack
Hi,
> 4.2.3 only failed c380004, c761007, and c953002.
c380004 can be considered to be an expected failure.
It also fails on x86-linux, and this is normal because
the code produced by the front-end (gcc-4.2) can't possibly pass.
Best wishes,
Duncan.
I am interested in working on the subject project:
Development->
Open projects->
projects for beginner GCC hackers->
General code cleanliness->
Disentangle the current web of header-header interdependencies.
My motivation: the problems a newbie faces when trying
