FAIL: PR16923 run at -m64 on i686-apple-darwin9

Mon Dec 22 14:55:00 GMT 2008

Jack Howarth wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 11:27:17AM +0000, Andrew Haley wrote:
>> Jack Howarth wrote:
>>> Can anyone explain why we always see the failure...
>>>>>> Running target unix/-m64
>>> FAIL: PR16923 run
>>>>>> on i686-apple-darwin9 when gcc trunk is build with...
>>>>>> Platform: i686-apple-darwin9
>>> configure flags: --prefix=/sw --prefix=/sw/lib/gcc4.4 --mandir=/sw/share/man --infodir=/sw/share/info --enable-languages=c,c++,fortran,objc,java --with-gmp=/sw --with-libiconv-prefix=/sw --with-ppl=/sw --with-cloog=/sw --with-system-zlib --x-includes=/usr/X11R6/include --x-libraries=/usr/X11R6/lib --with-arch=nocona --with-tune=generic --build=i686-apple-darwin9 --host=i686-apple-darwin9 --target=i686-apple-darwin9
>>>>>> but apparently this failure disappears when gcc trunk is built
>>> with...
>>>>>> Platform: i686-apple-darwin9
>>> configure flags: --build=i686-apple-darwin9 --host=i686-apple-darwin9 --target=i686-apple-darwin9 --with-gnu-as --with-tune=generic --prefix=/opt/gnu/gcc/gcc-4.4.0 --enable-debug=no --disable-nls --enable-languages=c,c++,objc,fortran,obj-c++,java,ada --enable-threads=posix --enable-__cxa_atexit --enable-java-gc=boehm
>> I'd have to run it to find out.
>>>>> I haven't tried this second form of building FSF gcc locally yet but was wondering if
>>> any of the configure options look to be likely candidates for the suppression of this
>>> failure. Also exactly is the difference between using -enable-java-gc=boehm and
>>> not using that option? I thought java used boehm by default, no?
>> Yes. It's not necessary to provide this option.

> Actually, my mistake. The test results I was looking at wasn't run at
> -m64. However it would be nice if one of the java developers who has access
> to i686-apple-darwin9 could take a look at this issue and update PR16923 with
> any observations on the failure at -m64.

Do you know of a gcj developer who has access to i686-apple-darwin9?
I'm not sure I do.
Andrew.