This is the mail archive of the gcc-bugs@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: Some g++ testsuite XPASS results

From: Neil Booth <neil at daikokuya dot demon dot co dot uk>
To: "Billinghurst, David (CRTS)" <David dot Billinghurst at riotinto dot com>
Cc: "'gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org'" <gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org>
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2001 07:38:46 +0000
Subject: Re: Some g++ testsuite XPASS results
References: <8D00C32549556B4E977F81DBC24E985D4100AB@crtsmail1.technol_exch.corp.riotinto.org>

[Get raw message]

Billinghurst, David (CRTS) wrote:-

> There are a couple of g++ tests that consistently XPASS with 3.1.  Namely:
>  * XPASS: g++.pt/decl2.C ICE - (test for errors, line 8)
>  * XPASS: g++.robertl/eb17.C  Execution test
> 
> I checked recent results for:
>  - i686-pc-linux-gnu
>  - i686-pc-cygwin
>  - mips-sgi-irix6.5
>  - hppa2.0-hp-hpux10.20
>  - i686-unknown-sysv5UnixWare7.1.0
>  - sparcv9-sun-solaris2.7
>  - alphaev6-unknown-linux-gnu
>  - mipsel-unknown-linux-gnu
> 
> Should I prepare a patch to remove the XFAILs?     

Sounds like a good idea to me.  The less noise the better.

Neil.

References:
- Some g++ testsuite XPASS results
  - From: Billinghurst, David (CRTS)

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