On Fri, 15 Jan 2021, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 14, 2021 at 07:26:36PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek via Gcc-patches wrote:
> > Is this ok for trunk if it passes bootstrap/regtest?
>
> So, x86_64-linux bootstrap unfortunately broke due to the -march=i486
> changes, but at least i686-linux bootstra
On Thu, 14 Jan 2021, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 14, 2021 at 10:49:42AM -0700, Martin Sebor wrote:
> > > In the light of Martins patch this is probably reasonable but still
> > > the general direction is wrong (which is why I didn't approve Martins
> > > original patch). I'm also somewhat
On Thu, Jan 14, 2021 at 07:26:36PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek via Gcc-patches wrote:
> Is this ok for trunk if it passes bootstrap/regtest?
So, x86_64-linux bootstrap unfortunately broke due to the -march=i486
changes, but at least i686-linux bootstrap succeeded and shows 2
regressions.
One is on g++.d
On Thu, Jan 14, 2021 at 10:49:42AM -0700, Martin Sebor wrote:
> > In the light of Martins patch this is probably reasonable but still
> > the general direction is wrong (which is why I didn't approve Martins
> > original patch). I'm also somewhat disappointed we're breaking this
> > so late in the
