http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44488
Iain Sandoe changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44488
--- Comment #13 from Iain Sandoe 2011-01-11 08:36:42
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #12)
> (In reply to comment #11)
> > should this be closed as fixed - and, if not, what is the remaining issue?
>
> The remaining issue is that the just built comp
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44488
--- Comment #12 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke
2011-01-10 23:18:09 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #11)
> should this be closed as fixed - and, if not, what is the remaining issue?
The remaining issue is that the just built compiler under test looks i
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44488
--- Comment #11 from Iain Sandoe 2011-01-10 20:25:19
UTC ---
should this be closed as fixed - and, if not, what is the remaining issue?
--- Comment #10 from iains at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-13 15:32 ---
of course, there should not be different behavior with/without
--enable-build-with-cxx, so I guess that the test-suite fix is only part of the
solution.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44488
--- Comment #9 from iains at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-13 15:20 ---
Subject: Bug 44488
Author: iains
Date: Tue Jul 13 15:20:21 2010
New Revision: 162144
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=162144
Log:
PR objc/44488
* lib/objc-torture.exp (objc-set-r
--- Comment #8 from amylaar at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-11 01:01 ---
(In reply to comment #7)
> Created an attachment (id=21173)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21173&action=view) [edit]
...
> let me know if it solve that aspect of the problem for you.
Yes, it do
--- Comment #7 from iains at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-10 10:38 ---
Created an attachment (id=21173)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=21173&action=view)
improve robustness of runtime option choices.
This should resolve the case where -fnext-runtime would be consider
--- Comment #6 from iains at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-09 23:40 ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> Is the compiler supposed to ignore an installed objc gnu runtime when testing
> in the build directory with -fnext-runtime?
Well, it's actually the other way round - it needs to find the pr
--- Comment #5 from amylaar at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-10 09:28 ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> I've found now that the runtime is picked up from the install location.
P.S.: That doesn't happen when I cut & paste the LD_LIBRARY_PATH settings
and the compile command from the log file
--- Comment #4 from amylaar at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-10 09:18 ---
I've found now that the runtime is picked up from the install location.
For default configuration, I use --prefix=/user/inria , and the file is
then picked up from
/user/inria/lib/gcc/i686-pc-linux-gnu/4.6.0/include/
--- Comment #3 from amylaar at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-10 05:41 ---
I see the same problem now with revision 160389.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44488
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-10 01:06 ---
On x86_64-linux-gnu it does the correct thing:
Executing on host: /home/pinskia/src/local/gcc/objdir/gcc/xgcc
-B/home/pinskia/src/local/gcc/objdir/gcc/
/home/pinskia/src/local/gcc/gcc/testsuite/objc/compile/trivial.m
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-10 01:04 ---
-fnext-runtime should fail on x86-linux-gnu anyways. Why it is not failing is
a good question. If this is failing without --enable-build-with-cxx there is
a bug somewhere.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org cha
14 matches
Mail list logo
