public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug target/102772] [12 regression] g++.dg/torture/pr80334.C FAILs
Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2022 14:47:14 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <bug-102772-4-dmKLmadaMz@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bug-102772-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102772

--- Comment #49 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE <ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE> ---
> Anyway, I'm out of ideas and unfortunately Solaris/x86 is not on GCCFarm.

I'd meant to provide a Solaris/x86 system for the cfarm, but it turned
out every user would have to sign an acceptable use policy and run
through a video ident before being granted access, which I consider
unusable for developers and too much effort on the admin side.

I'll see if I can find a different solution, though.

In the meantime, it's possible for indivudual gcc developers to get
regular access to my internal gcc test farm.  I've done that with iant,
for example.  Let me know if you're interested.

> Why is this a P1 when Solaris/x86 is neither primary nor secondary though?

I have no idea: it certainly wasn't me...

> Unless it reproduces also on Solaris/SPARC, which is primary but is on GCCFarm.

No, Solaris/SPARC is fine.

  parent reply	other threads:[~2022-04-13 14:47 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 55+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-10-15 11:39 [Bug target/102772] New: " ro at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-10-15 11:40 ` [Bug target/102772] " ro at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-10-15 11:40 ` ro at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-10-15 11:40 ` ro at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-10-15 12:06 ` hjl.tools at gmail dot com
2021-10-15 13:02 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-10-15 14:29 ` ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE
2021-10-15 20:44 ` hjl.tools at gmail dot com
2021-11-16 11:51 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-11-23 12:36 ` ro at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-03-17 15:05 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-03-17 15:14 ` ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE
2022-03-21 11:44 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-03-21 12:01 ` ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE
2022-03-21 12:03 ` ro at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-03-21 12:03 ` ro at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-03-21 13:17 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-03-21 13:31 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-03-22 15:12 ` ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE
2022-03-22 17:00 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-03-23 13:56 ` ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE
2022-03-23 14:11 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-03-23 14:17 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-03-25 12:48 ` ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE
2022-03-25 12:53 ` ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE
2022-03-25 12:54 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-03-25 13:00 ` ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE
2022-03-25 13:06 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-03-25 13:13 ` ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE
2022-03-25 13:18 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-03-25 13:22 ` ro at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-03-25 13:49 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-03-30 14:06 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-03-30 14:45 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-03-30 14:52 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-03-30 14:56 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-03-30 15:04 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-03-30 15:13 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-03-30 15:23 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-03-31 13:46 ` ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE
2022-03-31 13:47 ` ro at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-03-31 14:16 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-03-31 14:18 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-03-31 14:49 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-03-31 15:15 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-03-31 15:47 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-04-04 11:54 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-04-11  9:13 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-04-11 14:19 ` ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE
2022-04-11 14:19 ` ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE
2022-04-11 15:29 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-04-12  7:53 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-04-13 14:47 ` ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE [this message]
2022-05-06  8:31 ` [Bug target/102772] [12/13 " jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-05-08 12:22 ` [Bug target/102772] [12/13/14 " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=bug-102772-4-dmKLmadaMz@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ \
    --to=gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body. 
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).