From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 6398 invoked by alias); 16 Apr 2002 02:06:02 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-prs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-prs-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 6384 invoked by uid 71); 16 Apr 2002 02:06:01 -0000 Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2002 19:06:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20020416020601.6383.qmail@sources.redhat.com> To: nobody@gcc.gnu.org Cc: gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org, From: "Kaveh R. Ghazi" Subject: Re: target/6299: sparcv9-sun-solaris2.7 gcc-3.1 C testsuite failure in execute/950511-1.c Reply-To: "Kaveh R. Ghazi" X-SW-Source: 2002-04/txt/msg00813.txt.bz2 List-Id: The following reply was made to PR target/6299; it has been noted by GNATS. From: "Kaveh R. Ghazi" To: rth@redhat.com Cc: gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: target/6299: sparcv9-sun-solaris2.7 gcc-3.1 C testsuite failure in execute/950511-1.c Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2002 21:56:20 -0400 (EDT) > From: Richard Henderson > > On Sun, Apr 14, 2002 at 04:03:24PM -0000, ghazi@caip.rutgers.edu wrote: > > It started as of a 4/12/2002 checkout: > > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2002-04/msg00478.html > > > > *** This is a regression from 3.0.3 and 2.95.2. > > Are you sure? It actually "started" by config.guess starting > to generate v9 code by default. > r~ Perhaps, but I look at it this way: I have a solaris box which happens to allow sparcv9 insns. The older gcc's installed on that system out of the box run the testcase fine. The current 3.1 snapshot out of the box doesn't. While the "guessed" configuration may have changed, from the user perspective its a regression because they don't know or care about the internal nuances of config.guess like we do. --Kaveh -- Kaveh R. Ghazi Director of Systems Architecture ghazi@caip.rutgers.edu Qwest Global Services