[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

GCC 3.0 first pass

The results from the first pass at GCC 3.0 (or maybe it's 3.1), using the
3.0 build package, but replacing the tarball with one taken from the CVS
HEAD as of 2002-02-10 (after removing lots of patches that got fixed in the

                === libstdc++-v3 Summary ===

# of expected passes            24
# of unexpected failures        173
# of unsupported tests          6

(followed by a make error for check-DEJAGNU which concerns me)

                === gcc Summary ===

# of expected passes            17617
# of unexpected failures        25
# of expected failures          54
# of unresolved testcases       8
# of unsupported tests          37

                === g++ Summary ===

# of expected passes            4933
# of unexpected failures        1036
# of unexpected successes       3
# of expected failures          974
# of untested testcases         15
# of unsupported tests          1

                === g77 Summary ===

# of expected passes            1452
# of unsupported tests          8

                === objc Summary ===

# of expected passes            1036
# of unexpected failures        6

As is fairly evident, this is far better than the GCC 2.95.4 results; but
libstdc++-v3 is still very broken (and, I suspect, is causing test failures
in g++, though I can't easily prove it). Many of the libstdc++-v3 failures
are "failed to produce binary", and that is the only piece with a Dejagnu
failure as well. So, *my* summary:

g77 passes with flying colors	(0/1452 failed)
objc probably passes		(6/1042 failed)
gcc probably passes		(25/17696 failed)
g++ fails			(1039/6946 failed)
libstdc++-v3 fails miserably	(173/197 failed)

*IF* I can figure out why the C++ stuff is failing so badly, and get it
beaten into shape, I think this is a strong recommendation in favor of 3.0
as the default compiler on NetBSD; the raw C compiler certainly appears to
be in good shape.
Joel Baker                           System Administrator - lightbearer.com
lucifer@lightbearer.com              http://users.lightbearer.com/lucifer/

Reply to: