From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 21674 invoked by alias); 5 Sep 2002 19:06:01 -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 21630 invoked by uid 71); 5 Sep 2002 19:06:01 -0000 Date: Thu, 05 Sep 2002 12:06:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20020905190601.21623.qmail@sources.redhat.com> To: ljrittle@gcc.gnu.org Cc: gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org, From: Loren James Rittle Subject: Re: libstdc++/7805: Test 18_support/numeric_limits.cc execution fails on cygwin Reply-To: Loren James Rittle X-SW-Source: 2002-09/txt/msg00087.txt.bz2 List-Id: The following reply was made to PR libstdc++/7805; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Loren James Rittle To: gdr@integrable-solutions.net Cc: David.Billinghurst@riotinto.com, gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: libstdc++/7805: Test 18_support/numeric_limits.cc execution fails on cygwin Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2002 14:00:47 -0500 (CDT) In article , Gabriel Dos Reis writes: > | Since this is > | also an ix86 machine, it doesn't surprise me. Consider a > | patch to use the looser check specialization for your > | platform (as long as you can rationalize it), pre-approved. > Please, NO, don't do that. I explained the reasons of the failure in > another message which should by now be recorded in audit trail. OK, of course, I defer to this. BTW, it is not in the audit trail for PR/7805 as visible from the WWW interface.