This is the mail archive of the
binutils@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: sh-linux is now broken
- To: NIIBE Yutaka <gniibe at m17n dot org>, nickc at redhat dot com
- Subject: Re: sh-linux is now broken
- From: "H . J . Lu" <hjl at lucon dot org>
- Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2001 08:05:01 -0800
- Cc: binutils at sourceware dot cygnus dot com
- References: <20011031131037.A2203@lucon.org> <20011031131238.A2284@lucon.org> <200111010130.fA11UZr10017@mule.m17n.org> <20011031214452.C9712@lucon.org> <200111010556.fA15uNk12013@mule.m17n.org> <200111021435.fA2EZhX09634@mule.m17n.org>
On Fri, Nov 02, 2001 at 11:35:43PM +0900, NIIBE Yutaka wrote:
> Conclusion: Those are not regressions by my change. Those tests
> depend on GCC. I'm using (modified) GCC 3.0.2.
That may explain it.
>
> NIIBE Yutaka wrote:
> > Yes, sure. I've fix some of them. I'm currently investigating following
> > four cases remained:
> >
> > > -------- Unexpected failures were:
> > > Running /home/gniibe/gniibe/c/src/ld/testsuite/ld-selective/selective.exp ...
> > > FAIL: selective4
> > > FAIL: selective5
>
> This test depends on C++. I'll check Linux/x86 case, and if it will
> emit same symbols, I'll change the test cases as expected failure.
Fine with me.
>
> > > -------- Unexpected successes were:
> > > Running /home/gniibe/gniibe/c/src/ld/testsuite/ld-undefined/undefined.exp ...
> > > XPASS: undefined function
> > > XPASS: undefined line
>
> It correctry emit function and the line number. I don't know the
> reason why it's not expected to pass. I'll check another architecture
> which uses DWARF2. Possibly, I'll change the test case as expected to
> pass.
Fine with me.
Nick, could you please take a look at
http://sources.redhat.com/ml/binutils/2001-10/msg00650.html
http://sources.redhat.com/ml/binutils/2001-10/msg00656.html
Thanks.
H.J.