Should 27_io/ios_base/storage/2.cc be XFAILed on powerpc64-apple-darwin9?

[Bradley Lucier]

On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 11:17:52AM +0100, Paolo Carlini wrote:
> Hi,
>> Should this be XFAILed on powerpc64-apple-darwin9?
> A patch doing that is essentially preapproved if you can confirm  
> that in
> the meanwhile the malloc bug (Radar 3884894) has been fixed for
> i386-apple-darwin and not for powerpc64-apple-darwin. Can you do that?

I don't quite understand: does XFAILing the test mean that the test  
isn't attempted, or just that if it fails it doesn't show up on the  
report (except incrementing the number of expected failures)?  I'd  
like it not to be attempted if it will want 34GB + of virtual memory.

Brad