From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48)
 id 3836E385803F; Thu,  6 Jan 2022 15:57:00 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 3836E385803F
From: "unlvsur at live dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug libstdc++/100017] [11/12 regression] error: 'fenv_t' has not
 been declared in '::' -- canadian compilation fails
Date: Thu, 06 Jan 2022 15:57:00 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: libstdc++
X-Bugzilla-Version: 11.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: build
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: unlvsur at live dot com
X-Bugzilla-Status: ASSIGNED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: redi at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 11.3
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-100017-4-pWPpnawa6i@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-100017-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-100017-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-BeenThere: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Gcc-bugs mailing list <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/options/gcc-bugs>,
 <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gcc-bugs>,
 <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 06 Jan 2022 15:57:01 -0000

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D100017

--- Comment #55 from cqwrteur <unlvsur at live dot com> ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #54)
> (In reply to Andrew Aladjev from comment #38)
> > Sure, patches works perfect. But we need somehow decrease the chance of
> > similar regressions in future. It is possible by adding any basic "cana=
dian"
> > build into the list of tests to be done before release. We should not t=
ry to
> > add such test into codebase itself, we need just to intrigue any of cor=
e gcc
> > developers to add this test into the virtual checklist.
>=20
> There is no "virtual checklist". If you care about a particular
> configuration then YOU should be submitting results to the gcc-testresults
> mailing list to report on the status of that config.
>=20
> The GCC devs are testing the configs and the targets that THEY care about.

so you mean GCC devs do not care about Canadian compilation?=