Re: About gcc builtin atomics
Mikael Pettersson dixit:
>Many things are indeed failing in the test suite on m68k. What you
>should do is to make two full bootstraps and regression test runs,
>first with a baseline version (I use FSF vanilla, you might want to
>use Debian's common gcc without your patch), and then with the
>baseline plus your patch. Then you 'diff' the test suite summary
>files from the two runs and analyze any new failures.
Sorry, I really do not have the time or energy for that.
>Build logs aren't interesting unless they show build failures.
>Proper test suite results are produced as follows:
[…]
Hrm.
I wanted to say something witty about the Debian build process
running the testsuite and displaying its output, but apparently
that isn’t done on m68k. Huh.
>0. prep sources, mkdir objdir, cd objdir, /path/to/source/configure ...
> as usual for any gcc build
>1. make bootstrap
>2. make -k check (don't forget the -k!)
>3. make mail-report.log
This is really too much manual effort (especially considering
the build chroot is thrown away after the package build), I fear.
(Especially with the wheezy freeze nearing.)
But maybe someone else is willing to do that with:
http://ftp.debian-ports.org/debian/pool-m68k/main/g/gcc-4.6/gcc-4.6_4.6.3-7+m68k.2.dsc
(the diff against 4.6.3-7 is what I’ll rebase against -8 and
submit to doko, no further changes needed, so just use that)
>gcc, perhaps Debian has its own place for posting test suite
>results?)
No, only for build logs, and tests are usually run during build.
>and with two patches to reduce 'genattrtab' overheads; with all
Huh interesting. I noticed genattrtab taking half a day or so,
instead of half an hour or so, from 4.4 on.
bye,
//mirabilos
--
FWIW, I'm quite impressed with mksh interactively. I thought it was much
*much* more bare bones. But it turns out it beats the living hell out of
ksh93 in that respect. I'd even consider it for my daily use if I hadn't
wasted half my life on my zsh setup. :-) -- Frank Terbeck in #!/bin/mksh
Reply to: