------- Additional Comments From davidm at hpl dot hp dot com 2004-11-04 18:06 ------- (In reply to comment #18) > On Thu, 2004-10-28 at 02:24, davidm at hpl dot hp dot com wrote: > > # of unexpected failures 115 > > This is a lot more failures than we should have. I didn't have any luck > in reproducing this though. I did an apt-get update and dist-upgrade on > my debian/unstable partition, rebooted just in case, built and installed > libunwind-0.98 from source, then did a gcc bootstrap and make check, and > got 46 gcc failures. This is from gcc mainline, last updated on Monday.
I tried this again, on two different Debian/unstable systems and it now worked much better. On the first (which had the 115 failures before), I got: # of unexpected failures 47 On the second, which has a "better" libc and gas installed I get: # of unexpected failures 41 Here, by "better" I mean a glibc which has some unwind-info fixes and a gas which handles the psp-relative unwind directives correctly. Though I should say that I did not try to verify that the additional passes are due to these differences. In any case, I agree now: GCC head looks pretty good! Also, you might like to know that as of last Friday, I was for the first time able to successfully complete a test which single-steps through a program from the beginning to the end (including all the ld.so startup/shutdown!), getting a backtrace after each instruction without detecting any failures! Of course, that doesn't prove that the unwind-info is 100% correct, but it _is_ a tough test. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18010
