On Mon, Jan 02, 2017 at 01:52:22PM +0100, Martin Liška wrote:
> Is it fine to install the patch to gcc-6 branch?
Ok.
Jakub
On 12/21/2016 04:03 PM, Martin Liška wrote:
> On 12/21/2016 11:28 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>> On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 11:20:33AM +0100, Martin Liška wrote:
>>> I like your approach!
>>> make check -k -j10 RUNTESTFLAGS="dg.exp=spellcheck-options-*" works fine.
>>>
>>> Am I install the patch after it
On 12/21/2016 11:28 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 11:20:33AM +0100, Martin Liška wrote:
>> I like your approach!
>> make check -k -j10 RUNTESTFLAGS="dg.exp=spellcheck-options-*" works fine.
>>
>> Am I install the patch after it survives proper regression tests?
>
> Ok.
>
> Al
On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 11:20:33AM +0100, Martin Liška wrote:
> I like your approach!
> make check -k -j10 RUNTESTFLAGS="dg.exp=spellcheck-options-*" works fine.
>
> Am I install the patch after it survives proper regression tests?
Ok.
Also, only related, seems we have misspelling candidates for
;sanitizer_opts[j].name,
>
>
> Jakub
>
I like your approach!
make check -k -j10 RUNTESTFLAGS="dg.exp=spellcheck-options-*" works fine.
Am I install the patch after it survives proper regression tests?
Thanks,
Martin
>From
On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 10:34:13AM +0100, Martin Liška wrote:
> As mentioned in the PR, we should not suggest option that is not allowed.
> Fixed by explicit removal of suggestions that are not acceptable.
>
> Patch can bootstrap on ppc64le-redhat-linux and survives regression tests.
>
> Ready to
Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: marxin
Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2016 12:16:02 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] Do not suggest -fsanitize=all (PR driver/78863).
gcc/ChangeLog:
2016-12-20 Martin Liska
PR driver/78863
* gcc.c (driver::build_option_suggestions): Call
remove_misspelling_candidate for -fsanitize=
