Re: [libitm] Skip static_ctor.C test (PR libitm/51173)

2012-01-17 Thread Aldy Hernandez
I'd like to simply disable it if they don't have other preferences. Disabling is fine with me.

Re: [libitm] Skip static_ctor.C test (PR libitm/51173)

2012-01-17 Thread Rainer Orth
Mike Stump writes: > On Jan 16, 2012, at 9:14 AM, Rainer Orth wrote: >> As suggested in the PR, it would be better to just skip the test to >> avoid noise in mail-report.log: > > Usually we avoid noise in the testing log files by making testcases > pass? I know, this one is kinda inelegant, but

Re: [libitm] Skip static_ctor.C test (PR libitm/51173)

2012-01-16 Thread Mike Stump
On Jan 16, 2012, at 9:14 AM, Rainer Orth wrote: > As suggested in the PR, it would be better to just skip the test to > avoid noise in mail-report.log: Usually we avoid noise in the testing log files by making testcases pass? I know, this one is kinda inelegant, but I'd just leave it as is. If

[libitm] Skip static_ctor.C test (PR libitm/51173)

2012-01-16 Thread Rainer Orth
As suggested in the PR, it would be better to just skip the test to avoid noise in mail-report.log: WARNING: libitm.c++/static_ctor.C compilation failed to produce executable The following patch does just that, and simplifies the dg-skip-if on the way. Bootstrapped without regressions on i386-pc