[Bug libstdc++/107814] [13 regression] experimental/filesystem/iterators/error_reporting.cc FAILs

2022-11-23 Thread redi at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107814 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|13.0|10.5 --- Comment #9 from Jonathan Wak

[Bug libstdc++/107814] [13 regression] experimental/filesystem/iterators/error_reporting.cc FAILs

2022-11-23 Thread cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107814 --- Comment #8 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:1cac00d013856fea4cee0f13c4959c8e21afd2d9 commit r13-4262-g1cac00d013856fea4cee0f13c4959c8e21afd2d9 Author: Jonathan Wakely Date:

[Bug libstdc++/107814] [13 regression] experimental/filesystem/iterators/error_reporting.cc FAILs

2022-11-23 Thread redi at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107814 --- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely --- (In reply to r...@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de from comment #6) > According to https://cfarm.tetaneutral.net/machines/list/, gcc210 is a > Solaris 10/SPARC system, so useless for trunk testing. Oh right, yes.

[Bug libstdc++/107814] [13 regression] experimental/filesystem/iterators/error_reporting.cc FAILs

2022-11-23 Thread ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107814 --- Comment #6 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE --- > --- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely --- > I'm unable to access the Solaris/x86 host in the compile farm (gcc210) so I > can't test if this fixes it. It passes on Solaris/sparc. Accor

[Bug libstdc++/107814] [13 regression] experimental/filesystem/iterators/error_reporting.cc FAILs

2022-11-23 Thread ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107814 --- Comment #5 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE --- > --- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely --- > I think I'll push the patch in comment 2 and we can see if it helps :-) I've just tried it on sparc and x86, 32 and 64-bit: the test PASSes

[Bug libstdc++/107814] [13 regression] experimental/filesystem/iterators/error_reporting.cc FAILs

2022-11-23 Thread redi at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107814 --- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely --- I think I'll push the patch in comment 2 and we can see if it helps :-)

[Bug libstdc++/107814] [13 regression] experimental/filesystem/iterators/error_reporting.cc FAILs

2022-11-23 Thread ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107814 --- Comment #3 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE --- > --- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely --- > Are you sure this is a regression? Isn't it the same case as PR104731, but > that > was only fixed for 27_io/filesystem/iterators/error_repo

[Bug libstdc++/107814] [13 regression] experimental/filesystem/iterators/error_reporting.cc FAILs

2022-11-22 Thread redi at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107814 --- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely --- Created attachment 53949 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=53949&action=edit Fix unsafe use of dirent::d_name I'm unable to access the Solaris/x86 host in the compile farm (gcc210) so I

[Bug libstdc++/107814] [13 regression] experimental/filesystem/iterators/error_reporting.cc FAILs

2022-11-22 Thread redi at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107814 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 Last reconfirmed|

[Bug libstdc++/107814] [13 regression] experimental/filesystem/iterators/error_reporting.cc FAILs

2022-11-22 Thread ro at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107814 Rainer Orth changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |13.0