From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 31040 invoked by alias); 23 Mar 2011 20:44:12 -0000 Received: (qmail 31017 invoked by uid 22791); 23 Mar 2011 20:44:10 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from g1t0029.austin.hp.com (HELO g1t0029.austin.hp.com) (15.216.28.36) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Wed, 23 Mar 2011 20:44:05 +0000 Received: from g1t0038.austin.hp.com (g1t0038.austin.hp.com [16.236.32.44]) by g1t0029.austin.hp.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 16DBF386CF; Wed, 23 Mar 2011 20:44:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [16.89.92.85] (hpsje.cup.hp.com [16.89.92.85]) by g1t0038.austin.hp.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6BA6130059; Wed, 23 Mar 2011 20:44:04 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: [patch, hpux, testsuite] XFAIL pr47917.c for non-conforming snprintf From: Steve Ellcey Reply-To: sje@cup.hp.com To: John David Anglin Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, danglin@gcc.gnu.org, jakub@gcc.gnu.org In-Reply-To: <20110323203431.65B9B4E7D@hiauly1.hia.nrc.ca> References: <20110323203431.65B9B4E7D@hiauly1.hia.nrc.ca> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2011 20:44:00 -0000 Message-ID: <1300913043.17764.261.camel@hpsje.cup.hp.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2011-03/txt/msg01548.txt.bz2 On Wed, 2011-03-23 at 16:34 -0400, John David Anglin wrote: > > This patch moves gcc.c-torture/execute/pr47917.c to > > gcc.dg/torture/pr47917.c so that I can use dg-* directives in the test > > and then adds xfails for HP-UX. On HP-UX 10.* there is no snprintf > > The new gcc.dg/torture/pr47917.c lacks some code. It's there, but the diff only showed the changes from the original file that it was moved from. > > Dave, can you verify this fix on HP-UX 10.*? I don't have any HP-UX > > 10.* systems anymore. Tested on IA64 and PA HP-UX 11.11 and 11.23. > > This will take some time. I would just go ahead without this check > if moving the test is ok. Sounds good. I think moving the test is OK, that was what I was told to do last time I needed to XFAIL a test in gcc.c-torture. Steve Ellcey sje@cup.hp.com