This is the mail archive of the mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Re: [patch] make check-c++ bits

> We should be careful, adding language-centric targets like this, to
> indicate languages (c, c++, java, f77) and compilers (gcc, g++, gcj,
> g77) appropriately and correctly.  "check-g++" should check the
> compiler, but "check-c++" should check all appropriate c++-related
> things, regardless of which Makefile you're using.  That doesn't mean
> that all those targets must be there, but if they *are* there, we
> should be careful to choose the appropriate names according to whether
> the target is compiler-specific, or language-specific.

...that makes at least two of us. I really think these language-specific 
things are the right way to go.......

> I'm wondering if we should have a top-level "check-languages" that
> checks all gcc-based compilers and all their runtimes, for people who
> have builds that include things besides gcc (like gdb, cygwin, etc).

Perhaps they can get added on an as-desired basis? 

> + 	  (cd gcc; $(MAKE) $(GCC_FLAGS_TO_PASS) check-c++; cd $(r)); \
> You shouldn't need the "cd $(r)" here.  The outer () forces a
> subshell, which isolates the first cd from the main shell.  Unless you
> know something the rest of us don't know. ;-)

Okay. My mistake. I'll remove that bit and check it in. 


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]