This is the mail archive of the java@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the Java 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: gcc 4.2.0, r120684 backport and Process_1/Process_5

From: David Daney <ddaney at avtrex dot com>
To: Jack Howarth <howarth at bromo dot msbb dot uc dot edu>
Cc: java at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Thu, 17 May 2007 08:43:27 -0700
Subject: Re: gcc 4.2.0, r120684 backport and Process_1/Process_5
References: <20070517132308.GA10994@bromo.msbb.uc.edu>

Jack Howarth wrote:

    Can anyone tell me what the expected testsuite results
are for libjava on i686-apple-darwin8 with current gcc trunk?

I always expect zero FAILs, but I have never run the testsuite on i686-apple-darwin8 either.

I backported the changes in r120684 to the release gcc 4.2.0...

http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2007-05/msg00437.html
and it reduced the testsuite failures from 90 to 27. However I now
see a single new failure for Process_5. On powerpc-apple-darwin8
the same changes introduces a single failure for Process_1 instead.
Interestingly on powerpc-apple-darwin8,

The process tests rely on a couple of things. The first is that signals and threads are posix like. The second is that 'sleep' and 'echo' are in the PATH and have posix semantics.

You could run the tests by hand and report the output. That would help us better understand what is happening.

David Daney

Follow-Ups:
- Re: gcc 4.2.0, r120684 backport and Process_1/Process_5
  - From: Jack Howarth

References:
- gcc 4.2.0, r120684 backport and Process_1/Process_5
  - From: Jack Howarth

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