This is the mail archive of the
gcc-regression@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: 5 GCC regressions, 0 new, with your patch on 2002-02-07T22:44:20Z.
- From: Andrew Pinski <pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu>
- To: gcc-regression at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Cc: bkoz at redhat dot com, trix at redhat dot com
- Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2002 20:40:27 -0500
- Subject: Re: 5 GCC regressions, 0 new, with your patch on 2002-02-07T22:44:20Z.
These 5 regressions all have to to fact that a warning was added
for no return statement for a non-void function can some fix them?
Thanks,
Andrew Pinski
PS If no one sends in a patch into the gcc or gdb changes I will
submit one tomorrow.
On Thursday, February 7, 2002, at 08:19 , GCC regression checker wrote:
> With your recent patch, GCC has some regression test failures, which
> used to pass. There are 0 new failures, and 5
> failures that existed before and after that patch; 0 failures
> have been fixed.
>
> The old failures, which were not fixed or introduced by your patch, are:
> powerpc-eabisim gcc.sum gcc.dg/debug/dwarf2-1.c
> powerpc-eabisim gdb.sum gdb.base/funcargs.exp:
> native gcc.sum gcc.dg/debug/dwarf2-1.c
> native gdb.sum gdb.base/funcargs.exp:
> native gdb.sum gdb.threads/linux-dp.exp:
>
> For more information, see
> <http://people.redhat.com/geoffk/gcc-regression/>.
>