From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 6693 invoked by alias); 20 Apr 2002 20:31:36 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 6681 invoked from network); 20 Apr 2002 20:31:35 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO dr-evil.shagadelic.org) (208.176.2.162) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 20 Apr 2002 20:31:35 -0000 Received: by dr-evil.shagadelic.org (Postfix, from userid 7518) id DEB359869; Sat, 20 Apr 2002 13:31:34 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 20 Apr 2002 13:31:00 -0000 From: Jason R Thorpe To: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFC] Get Alpha target to GDB_MULTI_ARCH_PARTIAL Message-ID: <20020420133134.V1627@dr-evil.shagadelic.org> Reply-To: thorpej@wasabisystems.com Mail-Followup-To: Jason R Thorpe , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com References: <20020420095435.T1627@dr-evil.shagadelic.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <20020420095435.T1627@dr-evil.shagadelic.org>; from thorpej@wasabisystems.com on Sat, Apr 20, 2002 at 09:54:36AM -0700 Organization: Wasabi Systems, Inc. X-SW-Source: 2002-04/txt/msg00687.txt.bz2 On Sat, Apr 20, 2002 at 09:54:36AM -0700, Jason R Thorpe wrote: > === gdb Summary === > > # of expected passes 6595 > # of unexpected failures 945 > # of unexpected successes 4 > # of expected failures 143 > # of unresolved testcases 118 > # of untested testcases 6 > # of unsupported tests 3 > > I would really like to know what the test results are on Digital Unix > or Linux (I can't easily install either of those on any of my Alpha > systems, unfortunately). FWIW, a very large number of my failures go away when I make sure the testsuite uses gcc-current rather than the 2.95.3 that's currently shipped with NetBSD. (Lots of the failures are off-by-one in line numbers.) Is there a way besides placing the location of the alternate compiler first in the PATH to make sure the correct compiler is chosen? -- -- Jason R. Thorpe