
Hi, I built ghc-6.10.2.20090504 on OS X 10.5.6 (Intel). The build succeeded, and the results of running the 6.10.2 (release) testsuite were: OVERALL SUMMARY for test run started at Wed May 6 04:21:54 EDT 2009 2413 total tests, which gave rise to 12919 test cases, of which 0 caused framework failures 2489 were skipped 10033 expected passes 301 expected failures 0 unexpected passes 96 unexpected failures Unexpected failures: 2469(ghci) 2816(ghci) DoParamM(normal) jl_defaults(ghci) jules_xref(ghci) jules_xref2(ghci) launchbury(ghci) lex(ghci) mod133(normal) num009 (normal ,optc,hpc,optasm,profc,profasm,ghci,threaded1,threaded2,profthreaded) reify (normal ,optc,hpc,optasm,profc,profasm,ghci,threaded1,threaded2,profthreaded) rittri(ghci) signals002(ghci,ghci) signals004 (ghci ,threaded1,threaded2,profthreaded,ghci,threaded1,threaded2,profthreaded) tc183(normal,optc,hpc,optasm,profc,profasm) tc217(normal,optc,hpc,optasm,profc,profasm) tc220(normal,optc,hpc,optasm,profc,profasm) tc223(normal,optc,hpc,optasm,profc,profasm) tc232(normal,optc,hpc,optasm,profc,profasm) tcfail126(normal) tree (normal ,optc,hpc,optasm,profc,profasm,ghci,threaded1,threaded2,profthreaded) (I assume that I should be testing with the latest released testsuite in the absence of a snapshot. Is that true?) Best Wishes, Greg

Hi Greg, On Wed, May 06, 2009 at 07:49:08AM -0400, Gregory Wright wrote:
I built ghc-6.10.2.20090504 on OS X 10.5.6 (Intel). The build succeeded, and the results of running the 6.10.2 (release) testsuite were:
Thanks for trying it out!
(I assume that I should be testing with the latest released testsuite in the absence of a snapshot. Is that true?)
You mean the 6.10.2 testsuite tarball? Yes, that's the best one to use. Thanks Ian
participants (2)
-
Gregory Wright
-
Ian Lynagh