[Bug libstdc++/29426] [4.2 Regression] static __recursive_mutex init vs __GTHREAD_RECURSIVE_MUTEX_INIT_FUNCTION

["ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org>]

------- Comment #15 from ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org  2006-10-31 11:16 -------
> Eric, it looks like you've got this fixed now: great news. Solaris test
> results for 2.10, 2.9, and 2.8 looked fine for the last month and a half,
> so I'd assumed this patch was not problematic.

I think it is, up to Solaris 9, but the failure mode is not so blatant.

> As a side note, it's hard to deal with paging in and out WRT this bug report
> over two months. If we're supposed to care about Solaris-2.5-7, then please,
> post test results on a (at least) weekly basis.

I'd say that we (the GCC project) have to care about Solaris 7 and up only,
at this point.  I'm personally interested in Solaris 2.5.1 and 2.6 for some
reasons, but I will certainly not bug anyone about them.

And, yes, I try to post results on a weekly basis for all Solaris versions:
  http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2006-10/msg01176.html
  http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2006-10/msg01177.html
  http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2006-10/msg01178.html
  http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2006-10/msg01179.html
  http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2006-10/msg01180.html
  http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2006-10/msg01181.html

I don't have any for recent mainline though, but you probably have already
guessed why.


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29426