gcc3 vs 176.gcc

[Andreas Jaeger]

Dale Johannesen <dalej@apple.com> writes:

> On Tuesday, January 8, 2002, at 04:23 PM, dewar@gnat.com wrote:
>
>>>> The answer is to get SPEC fixed somehow
>>
>> Interesting. What is the status of SPEC test that has undefined code
>> in it?
>
> I'm not exactly sure what you're asking.  SPEC CPU2000 is a benchmark,
> not a test.  SPEC regards standards compliance as a desirable goal, but
> not a requirement.  They are more interested in portability.  There are
> other cases where SPEC has nonstandard usage.  For example, "long long"
> was used before it was in the standards.

How should this code get fixed so that it works correctly?

Dale, please send a bugreport to the SPEC folks and include the fix
together with some background information.  SPEC allows such patches
to the source under specific circumstance.  The changes in SPEC v1.2
for building eon with GCC 3 and for building perl with glibc 2.2. are
the direct result of myself (and probably others) sending such
reports.  I worked together with the SPEC folks on a clean solution
for them and then got a src.alt patch that I was allowed to use in
official SPEC benchmarks.  Can you go this way with 176.gcc, please?

Thanks,
Andreas
-- 
 Andreas Jaeger
  SuSE Labs aj@suse.de
   private aj@arthur.inka.de
    http://www.suse.de/~aj