Hi David, > I've rebased and squashed the analyzer patch kit and squashed patch 2 > of the hash_table fix into it, and re-tested it successfully, so I've > pushed it to master (as 757bf1dff5e8cee34c0a75d06140ca972bfecfa7). > > I'm going to work through the various followup patches I had on my > branch and re-test and push to master those that seem appropriate.
I'm seeing quite a number of failures on Solaris (both sparc and x86), but also some on 32-bit Linux/x86: Running target unix/-m32 +FAIL: gcc.dg/analyzer/data-model-1.c (test for warnings, line 610) +FAIL: gcc.dg/analyzer/data-model-1.c (test for warnings, line 611) +FAIL: gcc.dg/analyzer/data-model-1.c (test for warnings, line 615) +FAIL: gcc.dg/analyzer/data-model-1.c (test for warnings, line 616) +FAIL: gcc.dg/analyzer/data-model-1.c (test for warnings, line 657) +FAIL: gcc.dg/analyzer/data-model-1.c (test for warnings, line 658) +FAIL: gcc.dg/analyzer/data-model-1.c (test for warnings, line 662) +FAIL: gcc.dg/analyzer/data-model-1.c (test for warnings, line 663) +FAIL: gcc.dg/analyzer/data-model-1.c (test for warnings, line 705) +FAIL: gcc.dg/analyzer/data-model-1.c (test for warnings, line 706) +FAIL: gcc.dg/analyzer/data-model-1.c (test for warnings, line 710) +FAIL: gcc.dg/analyzer/data-model-1.c (test for warnings, line 711) +FAIL: gcc.dg/analyzer/data-model-1.c (test for warnings, line 753) +FAIL: gcc.dg/analyzer/data-model-1.c (test for warnings, line 754) +FAIL: gcc.dg/analyzer/data-model-1.c (test for warnings, line 758) +FAIL: gcc.dg/analyzer/data-model-1.c (test for warnings, line 759) +FAIL: gcc.dg/analyzer/data-model-1.c (test for excess errors) I'll file PRs for the Solaris ones once I get to it. Wasn't analyzer supposed to be off by default, though? Rainer -- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Rainer Orth, Center for Biotechnology, Bielefeld University