From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 5832 invoked by alias); 19 Apr 2002 22:56:03 -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 5736 invoked by uid 71); 19 Apr 2002 22:56:02 -0000 Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2002 15:56:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20020419225602.5730.qmail@sources.redhat.com> To: davem@gcc.gnu.org Cc: gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org, From: Tom Tromey Subject: Re: libgcj/6092: sparc-sun-solaris2.7 gcc-3.1 has hundreds of libjava failures with -m64 Reply-To: Tom Tromey X-SW-Source: 2002-04/txt/msg01007.txt.bz2 List-Id: The following reply was made to PR libgcj/6092; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Tom Tromey To: rth@gcc.gnu.org Cc: davem@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org, ghazi@caip.rutgers.edu, java-prs@gcc.gnu.org, nobody@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: libgcj/6092: sparc-sun-solaris2.7 gcc-3.1 has hundreds of libjava failures with -m64 Date: 19 Apr 2002 16:59:21 -0600 >>>>> "rth" == rth writes: rth> Dave sez libffi for sparc64 is borked. This is a GC problem, not a libffi problem. The boehm-gc gctest program crashes in the same way as every java program; also a libffi problem wouldn't show itself as a systematic failure of all the libjava execute tests (most programs never use libffi). rth> I disbelieve this is a regression, so I've downgraded rth> priority to medium. I don't think it is a regression either. However, that leaves us in the odd situation where we build a compiler where the -m32 libraries work and the -m64 ones do not. This is why I had left it as high priority. That said, it isn't clear I'll actually be able to finish debugging this before the deadline, either. Tom