From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 12569 invoked by alias); 5 Aug 2014 11:51:22 -0000 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 Received: (qmail 12559 invoked by uid 89); 5 Aug 2014 11:51:21 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: smtp-relay.CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE Received: from snape.CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE (HELO smtp-relay.CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE) (129.70.160.84) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Tue, 05 Aug 2014 11:51:21 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE [127.0.0.1]) by smtp-relay.CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE (Postfix) with ESMTP id B66902F0; Tue, 5 Aug 2014 13:51:18 +0200 (CEST) Received: from smtp-relay.CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (malfoy.CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id LwCTiMx93oF1; Tue, 5 Aug 2014 13:51:17 +0200 (CEST) Received: from lokon.CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE (lokon.CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE [129.70.161.110]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp-relay.CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0EF692EE; Tue, 5 Aug 2014 13:51:17 +0200 (CEST) Received: (from ro@localhost) by lokon.CeBiTec.Uni-Bielefeld.DE (8.14.7+Sun/8.14.7/Submit) id s75BpGpL010164; Tue, 5 Aug 2014 13:51:16 +0200 (MEST) From: Rainer Orth To: Mike Stump Cc: Tom de Vries , GCC Patches Subject: Re: [PATCH][testsuite] Don't run cproj-fails-with-broken-glibc.c for broken glibc References: <53DA9714.5070707@mentor.com> <53DD1143.2030001@mentor.com> Date: Tue, 05 Aug 2014 11:51:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: (Mike Stump's message of "Mon, 4 Aug 2014 01:16:52 -0700") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (usg-unix-v) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2014-08/txt/msg00343.txt.bz2 Hi Mike, >> Or do we go with the removal suggestion of Mike? > > I=E2=80=99ll let others weigh in. I=E2=80=99m fine either way. Original= author likely > prefers the xfail, so I=E2=80=99m fine with the above. the test now XPASSes on Solaris, adding testsuite noise in the other direction on completely innocent systems. Given that we're not actually testing gcc behaviour or a workaround for a glibc bug here, but just alerting users to changed cproj semantics on old and newer glibc systems https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-04/msg01285.html I'd strongly suggest just removing the test and the supporting effective-target keywords. Rainer --=20 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------= -- Rainer Orth, Center for Biotechnology, Bielefeld University