[Bug fortran/33252] GCC-4.3.0 Bootstrap testsuite error increase

["michelin60 at gmail dot com" <gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org>]

------- Comment #4 from michelin60 at gmail dot com  2007-08-31 00:47 -------
(> Subject: Re:  GCC-4.3.0 Bootstrap testsuite error increase
> 
> > /var/tmp/43/gcc-4.3.0/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/libstdc++-abi/abi.exp.
> > ERROR: could not compile testsuite_abi.cc
> 
> This was fixed by:
> 2007-08-30  Jakub Jelinek  <jakub@redhat.com>
> 
>         PR target/33168
>         * config/rs6000/rs6000.c (rs6000_elf_in_small_data_p): Return
>         true if any of the compare_section_name calls returned true,
>         rather than if any returned false.

I am really confused now. I thought that PR33168 was fix by the patch from Dr.
Edelsohn.
It seems that Mr. Jelinek reversed the sense of the test.

In any case PR33168 referred to libstdc++ and not gfortran.   In any case I
re-bootstrapped  and got Mr Jelinek patch the results, still concerning gfortan
are as follows:

                === gfortran tests ===

Schedule of variations:
    unix

Running target unix
Using /usr/share/dejagnu/baseboards/unix.exp as board description file for
target.
Using /usr/share/dejagnu/config/unix.exp as generic interface file for target.
Using /var/tmp/43/gcc-4.3.0/gcc/testsuite/config/default.exp as
tool-and-target-specific interface file.
Running /var/tmp/43/gcc-4.3.0/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/dg.exp ...
FAIL: gfortran.dg/fmt_p_1.f90  -O0  execution test
FAIL: gfortran.dg/fmt_p_1.f90  -O1  execution test
FAIL: gfortran.dg/fmt_p_1.f90  -O2  execution test
FAIL: gfortran.dg/fmt_p_1.f90  -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer  execution test
FAIL: gfortran.dg/fmt_p_1.f90  -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -funroll-loops 
execution test
FAIL: gfortran.dg/fmt_p_1.f90  -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -funroll-all-loops
-finline-functions  execution test
FAIL: gfortran.dg/fmt_p_1.f90  -O3 -g  execution test
FAIL: gfortran.dg/fmt_p_1.f90  -Os  execution test
Running
/var/tmp/43/gcc-4.3.0/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/execute/builtins/builtins.exp
...
FAIL: gfortran.dg/large_real_kind_form_io_1.f90  -O0  execution test
FAIL: gfortran.dg/large_real_kind_form_io_1.f90  -O1  execution test
FAIL: gfortran.dg/large_real_kind_form_io_1.f90  -O2  execution test
FAIL: gfortran.dg/large_real_kind_form_io_1.f90  -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer 
execution test
FAIL: gfortran.dg/large_real_kind_form_io_1.f90  -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer
-funroll-loops  execution test
FAIL: gfortran.dg/large_real_kind_form_io_1.f90  -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer
-funroll-all-loops -finline-functions  execution test
FAIL: gfortran.dg/large_real_kind_form_io_1.f90  -O3 -g  execution test
FAIL: gfortran.dg/large_real_kind_form_io_1.f90  -Os  execution test
FAIL: gfortran.dg/large_real_kind_form_io_2.f90  -O0  execution test
FAIL: gfortran.dg/large_real_kind_form_io_2.f90  -O1  execution test
FAIL: gfortran.dg/large_real_kind_form_io_2.f90  -O2  execution test
FAIL: gfortran.dg/large_real_kind_form_io_2.f90  -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer 
execution test
FAIL: gfortran.dg/large_real_kind_form_io_2.f90  -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer
-funroll-loops  execution test
FAIL: gfortran.dg/large_real_kind_form_io_2.f90  -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer
-funroll-all-loops -finline-functions  execution test
FAIL: gfortran.dg/large_real_kind_form_io_2.f90  -O3 -g  execution test
FAIL: gfortran.dg/large_real_kind_form_io_2.f90  -Os  execution test
Running /var/tmp/43/gcc-4.3.0/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/execute/execute.exp
...
FAIL: gfortran.dg/nint_2.f90  -O0  execution test
FAIL: gfortran.dg/output_exponents_1.f90  -O0  execution test
FAIL: gfortran.dg/output_exponents_1.f90  -O1  execution test
FAIL: gfortran.dg/output_exponents_1.f90  -O2  execution test
FAIL: gfortran.dg/output_exponents_1.f90  -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer  execution
test
FAIL: gfortran.dg/output_exponents_1.f90  -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer
-funroll-loops  execution test
FAIL: gfortran.dg/output_exponents_1.f90  -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer
-funroll-all-loops -finline-functions  execution test
FAIL: gfortran.dg/output_exponents_1.f90  -O3 -g  execution test
FAIL: gfortran.dg/output_exponents_1.f90  -Os  execution test
Running /var/tmp/43/gcc-4.3.0/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/gomp/gomp.exp ...
Running /var/tmp/43/gcc-4.3.0/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/vect/vect.exp ...
Running
/var/tmp/43/gcc-4.3.0/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.fortran-torture/compile/compile.exp
...
Running
/var/tmp/43/gcc-4.3.0/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/execute.exp
...
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/mayalias-2.c compilation,  -O3 -g  (internal
compiler error)
FAIL: gcc.c-torture/execute/mayalias-3.c compilation,  -O3 -g  (internal
compiler error)
Running /var/tmp/43/gcc-4.3.0/gcc/testsuite/gcc.c-torture/execute/ieee/ieee.exp
...

                === gfortran Summary ===

# of expected passes            20768
# of unexpected failures        33
# of expected failures          8
# of unsupported tests          36


Please bring this to the attention of the appropriate gfortran people. As a
chemical engineer I am distressed that the gfortran people are not allowed any
more to backport strictly fortran frontend improvements. Both gcc-4.2.x and
gcc-4.3.0 in the eyes of many observers and even GCC maintainers leave a lot to
be desired. 

I would gladly go back to gcc-3.x.y were it not for the fortran-90/95 and
multiprocessing  capabilities. Partial differential equations (occurring in
heat and mass transfer; phase change, etc) require newer capabilities.

By the same token it appears that the C-compiler is getting top heavy with
esoterica and is no longer suitable for embedded applications (low level
control of chemical reactors and  status displays).

Thanks 
Armando Michelin


-- 

michelin60 at gmail dot com changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |dje at watson dot ibm dot
                   |                            |com, burnus at net-b dot de,
                   |                            |mark at codesourcery dot com


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33252