From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 1034 invoked by alias); 14 Jan 2004 09:26:18 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 1011 invoked by alias); 14 Jan 2004 09:26:17 -0000 Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 09:26:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20040114092617.1010.qmail@sources.redhat.com> From: "rearnsha at arm dot com" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org In-Reply-To: <20031006200259.12527.debian-gcc@lists.debian.org> References: <20031006200259.12527.debian-gcc@lists.debian.org> Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug bootstrap/12527] [3.4 regression] [arm] bootstrap error on arm-linux, miscompiling genconstants X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-SW-Source: 2004-01/txt/msg01517.txt.bz2 List-Id: ------- Additional Comments From rearnsha at arm dot com 2004-01-14 09:26 ------- Subject: Re: [3.4 regression] [arm] bootstrap error on arm-linux, miscompiling genconstants > > ------- Additional Comments From steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-01-14 09:18 ------- > What is also silly is that apparently an ARM maintainer thinks > this is critical, yet according to this audit log no ARM maintainer > has tried to solve this in the past three months. Richard, is > anyone working on a fix for this? Should arm/unknown-elf.h > default to another CPU? > I've been testing a patch since the weekend, once I had finally re-imaged my netwinder with a version of Linux that could bootstrap C++ these days. Yes it is critical for the release -- I don't believe that even 'secondary' platforms should not bootstrap 'out-of-the-box'. R. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12527