------- Additional Comments From ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-02-16
07:31 -------
> But since none of us have solaris we could not test it.
Not sure what you meant with "us", we are all GCC hackers here.
> So which testcases are regressions now (well just to make sure that I don't
> make a mistake when the next one gets fixed)?
The nominal mainline status as of today on Solaris 7, 8 and 9 is
32-bit:
=== libjava tests ===
Running target unix
FAIL: Array_3 execution - gij test
FAIL: Array_3 execution - gij test
FAIL: FileHandleGcTest execution - source compiled test
FAIL: FileHandleGcTest execution - gij test
FAIL: FileHandleGcTest execution - bytecode->native test
FAIL: FileHandleGcTest -O3 execution - source compiled test
FAIL: FileHandleGcTest execution - gij test
FAIL: FileHandleGcTest -O3 execution - bytecode->native test
=== libjava Summary ===
# of expected passes 3710
# of unexpected failures 8
# of expected failures 14
# of untested testcases 22
64-bit:
=== libjava tests ===
Running target unix
FAIL: Array_3 execution - gij test
FAIL: Array_3 execution - gij test
FAIL: FileHandleGcTest execution - source compiled test
FAIL: FileHandleGcTest execution - gij test
FAIL: FileHandleGcTest execution - bytecode->native test
FAIL: FileHandleGcTest -O3 execution - source compiled test
FAIL: FileHandleGcTest execution - gij test
FAIL: FileHandleGcTest -O3 execution - bytecode->native test
FAIL: Throw_2 execution - gij test
FAIL: Throw_2 execution - gij test
=== libjava Summary ===
# of expected passes 3708
# of unexpected failures 10
# of expected failures 14
# of untested testcases 37
that is, we are on par with the GCC 3.3.x and GCC 3.4.x results there. We still
have new regressions on Solaris 2.5.1 and 2.6 that I'm going to investigate.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10353
