merge-2.069 now builds (and passes most of) the test suite

[Joakim via digitalmars-d-ldc]

On Thursday, 4 February 2016 at 03:36:14 UTC, David Nadlinger 
wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Thanks to Johan Engelen's awesome work, the first usable LDC 
> version with a D-based frontend is inching closer and closer.
>
> There is still much left to be done, as it is in the aftermath 
> of every frontend merge. But I've fixed some of the most severe 
> bugs, and the test suite runners are up and running now again:
>
> ---
> The following tests FAILED:
>         242 - std.math (Failed)
>         243 - std.datetime (Failed)
>         253 - std.zip (Failed)
>         262 - std.string (Failed)
>         267 - std.uni (Failed)
>         321 - std.net.curl (SEGFAULT)
>         329 - std.regex.internal.tests (SEGFAULT)
>         603 - std.math-debug (Failed)
>         604 - std.datetime-debug (Failed)
>         614 - std.zip-debug (Failed)
>         623 - std.string-debug (Failed)
>         682 - std.net.curl-debug (SEGFAULT)
>         687 - std.regex-debug (SEGFAULT)
>         690 - std.regex.internal.tests-debug (SEGFAULT)
>         732 - dmd-testsuite-debug (Failed)
>         734 - dmd-testsuite (Failed)
> ---

Great news!  I was hoping the D frontend merge wouldn't take that 
long.  Is it normal for phobos tests to be failing on a merge, ie 
even when the frontend was C++?

> The current state is available from the "merge-2.069" branch on 
> ldc-developers/ldc. For now, you might want to use DMD to build 
> the frontend parts still, as there appears to be a C++ ABI bug 
> affecting it in LDC still.

Hmm, I was hoping to build ldc 2.069 on ARM too, which will 
require using ldc to compile the D frontend to ARM.  I thought 
dmd upstream builds fine with ldc, is this something different 
from the bug that build had before?