Re: Results for 4.2.0 20060320 (experimental) testsuite on powerpc-apple-darwin8.5.0 (-m64 results)

[Shantonu Sen <ssen at opendarwin dot org>]

On Mar 21, 2006, at 12:34 PM, Bradley Lucier wrote:

> I'm curious about whether any of the changes recently proposed to  
> clean up the x86-darwin port can be applied to the 64-bit PowerPC  
> darwin compiler;

Like what? I haven't really seen many cleanups that were x86/darwin- 
specific

> I'm getting the feeling that gcc on ppc64 darwin may become  
> something of an orphan.

Note sure what you mean here, but these ppc64 results are no worse  
than the ppc(32) results for Darwin. Did you look at the failures?

For example, here's your results:
                === g++ Summary ===

# of expected passes            10807
# of unexpected failures        1287
# of expected failures          67
# of unresolved testcases       14
# of unsupported tests          126

                === libstdc++ Summary ===

# of expected passes            355
# of unexpected failures        1576
# of expected failures          7
# of unsupported tests          323

And here's my results, on 10.4.3 with CVS odcctools (which has  
cctools-590.36/ld64-26.0.81)
                === g++ Summary ===

# of expected passes            9814
# of unexpected failures        1406
# of expected failures          65
# of unresolved testcases       77
# of unsupported tests          124

                === libstdc++ Summary ===

# of expected passes            354
# of unexpected failures        1589
# of expected failures          7
# of unsupported tests          323


This should inspire you with confidence that ppc32-darwin is as bad,  
if not worse, than ppc64-darwin. Many of the c++ failures are of the  
form:
/opt/odcctools/bin/ld: Undefined symbols:
__Unwind_GetIPInfo
collect2: ld returned 1 exit status

A fix for this was posted by Eric C. (<http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc- 
patches/2006-02/msg02041.html>), but never committed. Someone will  
have to decide Real Soon Now what the expected binary compatibility  
of GCC trunk vs. Mac OS X's libgcc should/will be. Andrew has filed  
this as <http://gcc.gnu.org/PR26792>

What is the prior art for other OS vendors that ship a shared libgcc?

Shantonu