This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: Bootstrap failure on i386-pc-solaris2.10

From: Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou at libertysurf dot fr>
To: Diego Novillo <dnovillo at google dot com>
Cc: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, Jonathan Wakely <jwakely dot gcc at gmail dot com>, Andreas Tobler <toa at pop dot agri dot ch>, Art Haas <ahaas at impactweather dot com>
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2007 18:59:03 +0100
Subject: Re: Bootstrap failure on i386-pc-solaris2.10
References: <200711092206.lA9M63YC005554@impdell3.impactweather.com> <200711171516.44413.ebotcazou@libertysurf.fr> <474071AB.9000205@google.com>

> No, that's not correct.  Configuring with --disable-checking is
> perfectly reasonable in some circumstances.  For instance, when testing
> the effect of a patch without the assertion noise.

Not sure what you call the "assertion noise", (reasonable) assertions in a 
compiler are a feature, --disable-checking should not be advertised since
all the assertions are now predicated on at least --enabled-checking=release.

That being said, if there is a bug, I agree that we should try and fix it.

-- 
Eric Botcazou

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Bootstrap failure on i386-pc-solaris2.10
  - From: H.J. Lu

References:
- Bootstrap failure on i386-pc-solaris2.10
  - From: Art Haas
- Re: Bootstrap failure on i386-pc-solaris2.10
  - From: Eric Botcazou
- Re: Bootstrap failure on i386-pc-solaris2.10
  - From: Diego Novillo

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]