This is the mail archive of the java-patches@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: [PATCH] Fix pr16789 failures on the SPARC

From: Bryce McKinlay <mckinlay at redhat dot com>
To: Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou at libertysurf dot fr>
Cc: tromey at redhat dot com, java-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Tue, 04 Jan 2005 17:51:02 -0500
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix pr16789 failures on the SPARC
References: <200501032135.12009.ebotcazou@libertysurf.fr> <m3llb9gctx.fsf@localhost.localdomain> <200501042251.15457.ebotcazou@libertysurf.fr>

Eric Botcazou wrote:

Thanks, this looks good. I wonder if it can go in at the moment... I do think it is an important fix, but is it a regression?

I personally think that all new failures in the regression testsuite should be treated as regressions (pr16789 is a new failure both on SPARC/Solaris and SPARC/Linux). Otherwise this would become seriously messy. That said, if you want me to run this by Mark...

Regardless of whether it fixes a regression, this is a simple and obvious fix which is very unlikely to have any unintended side-effects. In any case, libgcj should not be considered frozen - especially for bug fixes - just because the compiler is in regression-only mode.

Eric, please check this in!

Bryce

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [PATCH] Fix pr16789 failures on the SPARC
  - From: Tom Tromey

References:
- [PATCH] Fix pr16789 failures on the SPARC
  - From: Eric Botcazou
- Re: [PATCH] Fix pr16789 failures on the SPARC
  - From: Tom Tromey
- Re: [PATCH] Fix pr16789 failures on the SPARC
  - From: Eric Botcazou

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