From: Akim Demaille <akim@epita.fr>
To: Matthias Klose <doko@cs.tu-berlin.de>
Cc: "Kaveh R. Ghazi" <ghazi@caip.rutgers.edu>,
debian-gcc@lists.debian.org.mark, gcc@gcc.gnu.org,
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, zack@codesourcery.com,
Bison Bugs <bug-bison@gnu.org>
Subject: Re: gcc-3_2-branch bootstrap failure when using bison-1.50
Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2002 07:17:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <mv4it05mlqb.fsf@nostromo.lrde.epita.fr> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <mv4r8etmm3t.fsf@nostromo.lrde.epita.fr>
| Attached are backports of patches I found on the mailing
| lists (c, cp and java). Checked today's CVS with 1.35, CVS with the
| patch attached with 1.35 and with 1.50. cp and java don't show
| regressions. for c:
|
| - CVS and CVS+patch, both bison-1.35: no regressions.
| - bison-1.35 and bison-1.50, both CVS+patch:
|
| --- test-summary-1.35 2002-10-14 00:16:08.000000000 +0200
| +++ test-summary-1.50 2002-10-13 13:55:39.000000000 +0200
| @@ -39,11 +39,43 @@
| FAIL: gcc.c-torture/compile/20020927-1.c, -O3 -g
| FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/loop-2e.c execution, -Os
| FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/loop-3c.c execution, -Os
| +FAIL: gcc.dg/noncompile/920923-1.c (test for errors, line 69)
| +FAIL: gcc.dg/noncompile/920923-1.c (test for errors, line 72)
| +FAIL: gcc.dg/noncompile/920923-1.c (test for errors, line 74)
| +FAIL: gcc.dg/noncompile/920923-1.c (test for errors, line 77)
| +FAIL: gcc.dg/noncompile/920923-1.c (test for errors, line 69)
| +FAIL: gcc.dg/noncompile/920923-1.c (test for errors, line 72)
| +FAIL: gcc.dg/noncompile/920923-1.c (test for errors, line 74)
| +FAIL: gcc.dg/noncompile/920923-1.c (test for errors, line 77)
| +FAIL: gcc.dg/noncompile/920923-1.c (test for errors, line 69)
| +FAIL: gcc.dg/noncompile/920923-1.c (test for errors, line 72)
| +FAIL: gcc.dg/noncompile/920923-1.c (test for errors, line 74)
| +FAIL: gcc.dg/noncompile/920923-1.c (test for errors, line 77)
| +FAIL: gcc.dg/noncompile/920923-1.c (test for errors, line 69)
| +FAIL: gcc.dg/noncompile/920923-1.c (test for errors, line 72)
| +FAIL: gcc.dg/noncompile/920923-1.c (test for errors, line 74)
| +FAIL: gcc.dg/noncompile/920923-1.c (test for errors, line 77)
| +FAIL: gcc.dg/noncompile/920923-1.c (test for errors, line 69)
| +FAIL: gcc.dg/noncompile/920923-1.c (test for errors, line 72)
| +FAIL: gcc.dg/noncompile/920923-1.c (test for errors, line 74)
| +FAIL: gcc.dg/noncompile/920923-1.c (test for errors, line 77)
| +FAIL: gcc.dg/noncompile/920923-1.c (test for errors, line 69)
| +FAIL: gcc.dg/noncompile/920923-1.c (test for errors, line 72)
| +FAIL: gcc.dg/noncompile/920923-1.c (test for errors, line 74)
| +FAIL: gcc.dg/noncompile/920923-1.c (test for errors, line 77)
| +FAIL: gcc.dg/noncompile/920923-1.c (test for errors, line 69)
| +FAIL: gcc.dg/noncompile/920923-1.c (test for errors, line 72)
| +FAIL: gcc.dg/noncompile/920923-1.c (test for errors, line 74)
| +FAIL: gcc.dg/noncompile/920923-1.c (test for errors, line 77)
| +FAIL: gcc.dg/noncompile/920923-1.c (test for errors, line 69)
| +FAIL: gcc.dg/noncompile/920923-1.c (test for errors, line 72)
| +FAIL: gcc.dg/noncompile/920923-1.c (test for errors, line 74)
| +FAIL: gcc.dg/noncompile/920923-1.c (test for errors, line 77)
|
| === gcc Summary ===
|
| -# of expected passes 18721
| -# of unexpected failures 6
| +# of expected passes 18689
| +# of unexpected failures 38
| # of expected failures 66
| # of unsupported tests 43
Could someone given some details on these errors? I have frequently
used pre-1.50 to bootstrap GCC, with success. Unfortunately, due to
some stupid policy here, I have stopped downloading GCC and checking
it with the current Bisons. Nevertheless, I can't imagine what
incompatibility can have been introduced in the meanwhile.
Also, I'm not sure how
| - CVS and CVS+patch, both bison-1.35: no regressions.
| - bison-1.35 and bison-1.50, both CVS+patch:
should be read: it seems to say that there are no regressions with the
patch and 1.35 (line 1), and there are regressions with the patch and
1.35 (line 2).
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-10-14 9:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-10-13 5:03 Kaveh R. Ghazi
2002-10-13 21:37 ` Matthias Klose
2002-10-14 6:46 ` Akim Demaille
2002-10-14 7:17 ` Akim Demaille [this message]
2002-10-15 3:06 ` Matthias Klose
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2002-10-13 5:12 Kaveh R. Ghazi
2002-10-15 1:34 ` Mark Mitchell
2002-10-15 2:18 ` Zack Weinberg
2002-10-12 18:18 Matthias Klose
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=mv4it05mlqb.fsf@nostromo.lrde.epita.fr \
--to=akim@epita.fr \
--cc=bug-bison@gnu.org \
--cc=debian-gcc@lists.debian.org.mark \
--cc=doko@cs.tu-berlin.de \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=gcc@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=ghazi@caip.rutgers.edu \
--cc=zack@codesourcery.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).