[07:14] <kees> doko: so, in comparing testsuite output between Debian and Ubuntu, I notice that there some failures on Debian too, so I was going to skip those.
[07:17] <doko> kees: yes, that's ok. for upstream inclusion, prepare these tests for trunk/4.4 ...
[07:18] <kees> doko: okay, sounds good.  I'm worried they will ignore a lot of them that add things like "-Wno-format" to dg-options.  Any thoughts if they'll accept those kinds of things?
[07:20] <kees> also, I'm curious about one part I haven't been able to sort out yet.  Part of the testsuite does not honor dg-options, so it requires a .x file, but something seems to be removing it before the test.  (I added a .x and it shows up after debian/rules patch, but not after debian/rules build)  Seen anything like that before?
[07:22] <kees> and, as far as stuff that doesn't pass in Debian, this one tries to allocate an insane about of memory (and fails):
[07:22] <kees> gcc.c-torture/compile/limits-blockid.c
[07:23] <kees> you've swapped out.  :)
[07:24] <kees> oh, nm about the ".x" file, I just figured it out.  :)  still curious about upstream attitudes.
[16:01] <kees> doko: the gcc build runs the testsuite normally and with -fno-stack-protector.  the latter is breaking the ssp tests since the "no" option is overriding the dg-options.  Since there are no differences (besides ssp) between the two testsuite runs, can we just drop the -fno-stack-protect run?  (it'd speed up builds too)
[16:01] <doko> kees: away now, will answer tomorrow or Monday
[16:01] <kees> doko: okay