Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2012 10:01:44 -0500 From: David Schultz <das@freebsd.org> To: Dimitry Andric <dim@freebsd.org> Cc: svn-src-head@freebsd.org, Roman Divacky <rdivacky@freebsd.org>, src-committers@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r230368 - head/tools/regression/usr.bin/cc Message-ID: <20120120150144.GB306@zim.MIT.EDU> In-Reply-To: <4F19748F.3010906@FreeBSD.org> References: <201201200657.q0K6vMhf028463@svn.freebsd.org> <20120120075551.GA28975@freebsd.org> <4F19748F.3010906@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, Jan 20, 2012, Dimitry Andric wrote: > On 2012-01-20 08:55, Roman Divacky wrote: > >http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=11406 says this has been > >fixed, is this just problem with us having older clang in base? > > Obviously, it has only been fixed in llvm trunk. If this is a pressing > problem, we can backport the fix. Otherwise, it will be fixed when we > import a more recent snapshot. It isn't a pressing issue. The test was failing due to an even more basic bug than the one I was trying to test; adding two constants was producing the wrong answer. Therefore, I can't confirm that the test now passes, but they did fix *a* bug. By the way, having dealt with gcc bugs in the past, I found reporting a clang bug to be an unexpectedly pleasant experience.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20120120150144.GB306>