Dennis Clarke-2 wrote:
>
>
>> On Wed, Dec 08, 2010 at 02:42:56PM +0100, Richard Guenther wrote:
>>>
>> This was built against ppl 0.10.2 and cloog 0.15.10.
>
> Have you tried a bootstrap with neither ppl nor cloog ? I have yet to see
> their value and I generally exclude them. This results (
On 10/12/2010 20:49, Dave Korn wrote:
> I found a couple of new FAILs in my latest libjava testrun:
>
>> FAIL: newarray_overflow -O3 compilation from source
>> FAIL: newarray_overflow -O3 -findirect-dispatch compilation from source
>
> These turn out to be tree checking failures:
>
>> In fi
>
>
> Dennis Clarke-2 wrote:
>>
>>
>>> On Wed, Dec 08, 2010 at 02:42:56PM +0100, Richard Guenther wrote:
>>> This was built against ppl 0.10.2 and cloog 0.15.10.
>>
>> Have you tried a bootstrap with neither ppl nor cloog ? I have yet to
>> see
>> their value and I generally exclude them. T
Hi,
GNU Modula-2 1.0 has been released. Full details on how to download
gm2 can be found on the homepage www.nongnu.org/gm2. It successfully
passes all regression tests on both the x86_32 and x86_64 Debian
GNU/Linux platforms, for details about other ports please also see the
homepage.
A huge
Snapshot gcc-4.6-20101211 is now available on
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/4.6-20101211/
and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 4.6 SVN branch
with the following options: svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/trunk
Hi,
Using .init_array section on Linux/x86 raised a question on
init_priority. GCC manual says
`init_priority (PRIORITY)'
In Standard C++, objects defined at namespace scope are guaranteed
to be initialized in an order in strict accordance with that of
their definitions _in a give
While running the testsuite I see a number of warnings related to
timeouts. Is there some way to avoid these annoyances?
Thus :
=== gcc tests ===
Schedule of variations:
unix
Running target unix
Using /usr/local/share/dejagnu/baseboards/unix.exp as board description
file fo
On 12/12/2010 06:54, H.J. Lu wrote:
[ off-list, but it's not personal, so let's Cc the list back in, someone might
find this explanation of the mechanism useful in the archives. ]
> Can you check the assembly output? Since
>
>
> Note that the particular values of PRIORITY do not matter;
On 12/12/2010 00:47, H.J. Lu wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Using .init_array section on Linux/x86 raised a question on
> init_priority. GCC manual says
>
> `init_priority (PRIORITY)'
> In Standard C++, objects defined at namespace scope are guaranteed
> to be initialized in an order in strict accor
