perlbench results in segfault outside the SPEC 2006 harness

With these it helps It's hard to investigate in questions that don't provide required information to reproduce the issue. In your case, that would be the error type, and message, and the related code snippets, at least. -
Normally, your datePicker result "Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 BRST 2006" should be perfectly fine with standard code like that:

def index = {
    Date date = params.datePicker
    [date: params.datePicker ?: new Date()]
}

<g:datePicker name="datePicker" value="${date}" />

Date date = new SimpleDateFormat("EEE MMM dd HH:mm:ss z yyyy")
    .parse("Sun Jan 01 00:00:00 BRST 2006")

Date date = new SimpleDateFormat("EEE MMM dd HH:mm:ss z yyyy")
    .parse(params.datePicker)

around this issue I've found a solution to the problem.
The way to do that is to copy the benchmark directory, rename it and then remove the input files that are not wanted. It is important to remove both the ref and train input files. Moreover, it is necessary to edit the Spec/object.pm file to set the new name. It is also necessary to edit either of the CFP2006.bset or CINT2006.bset file to add the new benchmark, otherwise runspec would not display any results even in the raw file.

I hope this helps . Well, I was able to get what I wanted by constructing the individual parsers manually and running them.

    foreach my $test( @tests ) { 
        my @test_results;
        my $parser = TAP::Parser->new( { source => $test } );
        while( my $result = $parser->next ) { 
            push @test_results, 
              { text => $result->as_string,
                ...
              }
        }

Any of those help There is no reason to use Copy in either of those assignment statements. Normal assignment works fine. When you allocate b, the reference count of the array is 1. When you assign it to Result, the reference count becomes 2. (Personally, I'd just forego b and operate directly on Result from the start.) When the function returns, b goes out of scope and the reference count becomes 1 again. Finally, when the result is assigned to a, nothing happens because Result was actually an alias for a all along. Ultimately, you're left with one unique array, which should be exactly what you intended.
The compiler allowed your code because your code is fine. The compiler recognizes assignments between arrays just as it does assignments between strings and assignments between interface references, and it generates the right code to adjust the reference counts accordingly.