This is the mail archive of the
gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
[Bug target/7940] [3.3 regression] [Cygwin] Test gcc.dg/nest.c fails
- From: "dhazeghi at yahoo dot com" <gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- To: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: 11 Jul 2003 21:33:19 -0000
- Subject: [Bug target/7940] [3.3 regression] [Cygwin] Test gcc.dg/nest.c fails
- References: <20020916164600.7940.david.billinghurst@riotinto.com>
- Reply-to: gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org
PLEASE REPLY TO gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org ONLY, *NOT* gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=7940
pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
dhazeghi at yahoo dot com changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
GCC build triplet| |i686-pc-cygwin
GCC host triplet| |i686-pc-cygwin
GCC target triplet| |i686-pc-cygwin
Status|WAITING |NEW
Ever Confirmed| |1
Priority|P3 |P1
Last reconfirmed|0000-00-00 00:00:00 |2003-07-11 21:33:18
date| |
Summary|[Cygwin] Test gcc.dg/nest.c |[3.3 regression] [Cygwin]
|fails |Test gcc.dg/nest.c fails
Target Milestone|--- |3.3.2
------- Additional Comments From dhazeghi at yahoo dot com 2003-05-26 03:49 -------
Hello,
according to gcc testresults, this testcase still fails on gcc 3.3.1 (see http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-
testresults/2003-05/msg01248.html ) but does not on mainline (http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-
testresults/2003-05/msg01137.html ). Is this correct? Was this a testcase which worked in earlier
versions of gcc? Thanks,
Dara
------- Additional Comments From dhazeghi at yahoo dot com 2003-06-16 19:55 -------
David,
just a reminder. I was wondering whether this testcase fails on branch but not mainline? Did this
testcase ever pass on cygwin? Thanks,
Dara
------- Additional Comments From dhazeghi at yahoo dot com 2003-07-11 21:33 -------
Confirmed with gcc 3.3 branch (20030710) on cygwin. With both gcc 3.2 and
mainline (20030710) this problem does not occur.