From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 7776 invoked by alias); 6 Dec 2002 19:37:43 -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 7766 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2002 19:37:40 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO localhost.redhat.com) (216.138.202.10) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 6 Dec 2002 19:37:40 -0000 Received: from redhat.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5B7D43E2A; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 14:37:32 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <3DF0FC7C.6050209@redhat.com> Date: Fri, 06 Dec 2002 11:58:00 -0000 From: Andrew Cagney User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; NetBSD macppc; en-US; rv:1.0.0) Gecko/20020824 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: David Carlton Cc: Fernando Nasser , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com, Daniel Jacobowitz Subject: Re: [rfa] store.exp failures References: <3DEFEC76.6040109@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2002-12/txt/msg00235.txt.bz2 > On Thu, 05 Dec 2002 19:16:54 -0500, Fernando Nasser said: > > >> I don't think not being static affects the goal of test at all, so if >> it fixes the problem I have no objection. > > > Thanks, I've committed it. Thanks. In case you're wondering, yes it does pass but with older compilers. Now we get to see what bugs it flushes out ... I'm also wondering of GCC eliminating functions when -O0 is a bug. Andrew