Deprecating ARM FPA support (was: ARM Neon Tests Failing on non-Neon Target)

2010-05-22 Thread Martin Guy
On 5/11/10, Mark Mitchell wrote: > Richard Earnshaw wrote: > > > Speaking of which, we should probably formally deprecate the old arm-elf > > derived targets in 4.6 so that we can remove them in 4.7. > > > Similarly, we should deprecate support for the FPA on ARM. > > I agree. No one seems to

Re: LTO and libelf (and FreeBSD)

2010-05-22 Thread Gerald Pfeifer
On Thu, 20 May 2010, Kai Wang wrote: > The elf_getbase() API in FreeBSD libelf can only be called using an > archive member ELF descriptor. It will return -1 (indicates an error) > when called with a "regular" ELF object. > > The lto_obj_build_section_table() function in lto-elf.c calls > elf_ge

gcc-4.6-20100522 is now available

2010-05-22 Thread gccadmin
Snapshot gcc-4.6-20100522 is now available on ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/4.6-20100522/ and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details. This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 4.6 SVN branch with the following options: svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/trunk

Re: LTO and libelf (and FreeBSD)

2010-05-22 Thread Steve Kargl
On Sat, May 22, 2010 at 11:07:44PM +0200, Richard Guenther wrote: > On Sat, May 22, 2010 at 10:29 PM, Steve Kargl > wrote: > > Guys, > > > > I only read the gcc@ archive, so sorry about breaking the thread. > > Testing with gfortran finds > > > > FreeBSD's libelf with no patches. > > > > # of unex

Re: LTO and libelf (and FreeBSD)

2010-05-22 Thread Gerald Pfeifer
On Sat, 22 May 2010, Richard Guenther wrote: > Hm, so you didn't test FreeBSD's libelf without Kias patch but my GCC patch > applied. (at least my patch doesn't make the situation worse for any case > it seems) I'll be submitting result for that around noon your time tomorrow- Right now I am test

C++ ABI change for std::bad_array_new_length

2010-05-22 Thread Florian Weimer
This C++0X feature seems to need a change in the cross-vendor C++ ABI. Have the details already been spelled out? There is some interaction with the VLA C++ extension. We should probably prohibit allocation of objects of a VLA-based type with operator new and operator new[].

Re: LTO and libelf (and FreeBSD)

2010-05-22 Thread Richard Guenther
cted passes            34177 > # of unexpected failures        40 > # of expected failures          33 > # of unresolved testcases       37 > # of unsupported tests          266 > gfortran  version 4.6.0 20100522 (experimental) (GCC) > > > FreeBSD's libelf with Kia'

GCC 4.3.5 Status Report (2010-05-22)

2010-05-22 Thread Richard Guenther
Status == The GCC 4.3.5 release has been created and uploaded, it will be announced once the mirrors had a chance to pick it up. The 4.3 branch is open again for regression and documentation fixes. Previous Report === http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2010-05/msg00253.html I will co

Re: LTO and libelf (and FreeBSD)

2010-05-22 Thread Steve Kargl
# of unresolved testcases 37 # of unsupported tests 266 gfortran version 4.6.0 20100522 (experimental) (GCC) FreeBSD's libelf with Kia's patch === gfortran Summary === # of expected passes34204 # of unexpected failures19 # of ex