[Bug target/83443] FAIL: gcc.dg/tree-ssa/builtin-sprintf-warn-18.c (test for warnings, line 119)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83443 John David Anglin changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/83443] FAIL: gcc.dg/tree-ssa/builtin-sprintf-warn-18.c (test for warnings, line 119)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83443 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |WAITING --- Comment #10 from Martin Sebor

[Bug target/83443] FAIL: gcc.dg/tree-ssa/builtin-sprintf-warn-18.c (test for warnings, line 119)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83443 John David Anglin changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|2018-01-15 00

[Bug target/83443] FAIL: gcc.dg/tree-ssa/builtin-sprintf-warn-18.c (test for warnings, line 119)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83443 --- Comment #8 from Martin Sebor --- Yes, that's what I'm thinking. Thanks for confirming that!

[Bug target/83443] FAIL: gcc.dg/tree-ssa/builtin-sprintf-warn-18.c (test for warnings, line 119)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83443 --- Comment #7 from Christophe Lyon --- Both compilers targets are 32-bits. But the native one is built on a 32-bits host (arm), while my cross-compilers are built on x86_64 64-bits hosts. Could that make a difference?

[Bug target/83443] FAIL: gcc.dg/tree-ssa/builtin-sprintf-warn-18.c (test for warnings, line 119)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83443 --- Comment #6 from Martin Sebor --- Is the difference between the native compiler and the cross that the former is 32-bit and the latter 64-bit? If that's I might be able to reproduce it with a 32-bit i386 cross. Let me check the warning code

[Bug target/83443] FAIL: gcc.dg/tree-ssa/builtin-sprintf-warn-18.c (test for warnings, line 119)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83443 Christophe Lyon changed: What|Removed |Added CC||clyon at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #

[Bug target/83443] FAIL: gcc.dg/tree-ssa/builtin-sprintf-warn-18.c (test for warnings, line 119)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83443 --- Comment #4 from Martin Sebor --- I can't reproduce the failures with my cross-compilers. For instance, with an arm-none-linux-gnueabihf cross I get the expected output for a test case reduced from the one on line 120: $ cat u.c && /build/ar

[Bug target/83443] FAIL: gcc.dg/tree-ssa/builtin-sprintf-warn-18.c (test for warnings, line 119)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83443 samtebbs at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||samtebbs at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug target/83443] FAIL: gcc.dg/tree-ssa/builtin-sprintf-warn-18.c (test for warnings, line 119)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83443 --- Comment #2 from dave.anglin at bell dot net --- r247448 build was okay while 247726 shows the two failures. I think this implies the failures were introduced by r247444: 2017-05-01 Martin Sebor * tree-ssa/builtin-sprintf-warn-18.

[Bug target/83443] FAIL: gcc.dg/tree-ssa/builtin-sprintf-warn-18.c (test for warnings, line 119)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83443 Martin Sebor changed: What|Removed |Added CC||msebor at gcc dot gnu.org Compon