Regression for csl-arm on arm-none-elf

[Autocrasher]

30 new FAIL's (101 total) have appeared for arm-none-elf:
    g++.sum g++.dg/ext/visibility/assign1.C
    g++.sum g++.dg/ext/visibility/fvisibility-inlines-hidden.C
    g++.sum g++.dg/ext/visibility/fvisibility-override1.C
    g++.sum g++.dg/ext/visibility/fvisibility-override2.C
    g++.sum g++.dg/ext/visibility/fvisibility.C
    g++.sum g++.dg/ext/visibility/memfuncts.C
    g++.sum g++.dg/ext/visibility/new1.C
    g++.sum g++.dg/ext/visibility/noPLT.C
    g++.sum g++.dg/ext/visibility/pragma-override1.C
    g++.sum g++.dg/ext/visibility/pragma-override2.C
    g++.sum g++.dg/ext/visibility/pragma.C
    g++.sum g++.dg/ext/visibility/staticmemfuncts.C
    g++.sum g++.dg/ext/visibility/virtual.C
    g++.sum g++.dg/ext/visibility/visibility-1.C
    g++.sum g++.dg/ext/visibility/visibility-2.C
    g++.sum g++.dg/ext/visibility/visibility-3.C
    g++.sum g++.dg/ext/visibility/visibility-4.C
    g++.sum g++.dg/ext/visibility/visibility-5.C
    g++.sum g++.dg/ext/visibility/visibility-6.C
    g++.sum g++.dg/ext/visibility/visibility-7.C
    gcc.sum gcc.dg/visibility-1.c
    gcc.sum gcc.dg/visibility-2.c
    gcc.sum gcc.dg/visibility-3.c
    gcc.sum gcc.dg/visibility-4.c
    gcc.sum gcc.dg/visibility-5.c
    gcc.sum gcc.dg/visibility-6.c
    gcc.sum gcc.dg/visibility-7.c
    gcc.sum gcc.dg/visibility-8.c
    gcc.sum gcc.dg/visibility-9.c
    gcc.sum gcc.dg/visibility-a.c
These tests passed the last time they were ran.

Attached are the ChangeLogs since the previous run.  Possibly a patch with
your name on it has caused the problem(s).


The full transcript is at http://www.devphil.com/build/
Specific problem logs at http://www.devphil.com/build/reports/tests-cslarm/
(explanations of each file are on the main page; you probably want summary*)

Host was an athlon-xp (i686) system.  Target was specified as arm-none-elf.

This particular run used a unified gcc+binutils tree.

This email is generated by a machine, not sent from a person.  If you think
it's been sent to you in error, please see the gcc-regression list archives
for possible followup discussion; this could be legitimate or it could be a
false positive.  Also watch for email from the other regression testers and
check the logs from the known autobuilders.

If you write a response, please respect the Reply-To: header.


With love,
The Autocrasher (Phil's Builder Bot, version 2.1)

=========================================================================
-------------- next part --------------
diff -u1r previous/CL/gcc/ChangeLog.csl-arm current/CL/gcc/ChangeLog.csl-arm
--- previous/CL/gcc/ChangeLog.csl-arm	2004-09-12 08:45:03.000000000 -0400
+++ current/CL/gcc/ChangeLog.csl-arm	2004-09-19 06:38:35.000000000 -0400
@@ -1 +1,24 @@
+2004-09-18  Paul Brook  <paul@codesourcery.com>
+
+	* testsuite/g++.old-deja/g++.pt/static11.C: XFAIL on arm*-*-eabi.
+
+2004-09-15  Mark Mitchell  <mark@codesourcery.com>
+
+	* testsuite/g++.old-deja/g++.abi/cxa_vec.C: Adjust for ARM
+	EABI.
+
+2004-09-15  Mark Mitchell  <mark@codesourcery.com>
+
+	* cp/decl.c (cxx_comdat_group): Check for VAR_DECLs before
+	using DECL_VTABLE_OR_VTT_P.
+
+2004-09-14  Mark Mitchell  <mark@codesourcery.com>
+
+	* config.gcc: Do not build a shared libgcc for arm-none-eabi.
+
+2004-09-14  Paul Brook  <paul@codesourcery.com>
+
+	* config/arm/arm.c (arm_expand_prologue): Make args_to_push a
+	HOST_WIDE_INT.
+
 2004-09-10  Mark Mitchell  <mark@codesourcery.com>