X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.7 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SARE_MSGID_LONG40,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <5460e3331002102240t20248f5en581227dd1d8ae3f0@mail.gmail.com> References: <5460e3331002102240t20248f5en581227dd1d8ae3f0 AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> Date: Sun, 14 Feb 2010 15:30:53 +0100 Message-ID: <5460e3331002140630k60e778c6kb34717b522c1e690@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: [gcc] FYI, libffi FAILs with cygwin snapshot 20100205, 20100207 & 20100210... From: Christian Joensson To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Cc: Dave Korn Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com 2010/2/11 Christian Joensson: >>> Just FYI... the latest posted test results, at >>> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2010-02/msg00907.html, shows a >>> substatntial amount of FAILs for libffi, this is with cygwin1.dll >>> snapshot 20100207 (I also checked briefly using 20100210, also gives a >>> lot of FAILs in libffi), rolling back to cygwin1.dll of 1.7.1-1, the >>> results are back to normal.. Something crept up between 1.7.1-1 and >>> 20100207 snapshot that simply makes a mess with libffi test results. >>> That's the FYI... >>> >> >> A "diff ../../../objdir-156618/libffi.log testsuite/libffi.log" (where >> the first file is the log file when using the cygwin1.dll snapshot >> 20100207 and the second file is using the 1.7.1-1 one) gives me this >> (as an example): >> >> 1c1 >> < Test Run By chj on Tue Feb =A09 13:17:04 2010 >> --- >>> Test Run By chj on Wed Feb 10 11:39:41 2010 >> 115,118c115,118 >> < 7 8. 9 1 9. 3: 8 17. 12 >> < res: 8 17. 12 >> < 7 8. 9 1 9. 3: 8 17. 12 >> < res: 8 17. 12 >> --- >>> 7 8 9 1 9 3: 8 17 12 >>> res: 8 17 12 >>> 7 8 9 1 9 3: 8 17 12 >>> res: 8 17 12 >> >> >> Note the crept in "." (dot) which is symptomatic for the situation... >> if this rings a bell in anyone's ear? > > well, maybe this never shows up on cygwin developers' list.. but > > 20100204 works... 20100205 doesn't... FWIW, 20100212 does seem to suffer from similar problems as does 201002{05,07,10} does, ie, gcc trunk (revision 156700) libffi testsuite have the same issue with crept in "." --=20 Cheers, /ChJ -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple