This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org 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]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: make grokfield handle locations


On Tue, 19 Aug 2008, Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote:

> I disagree here. We massively override and work-around DejaGNU since a
> long time ago. No ideal but I think we could almost carry our own copy
> of DejaGNU. We will certainly be able to simplify things and reduce
> duplication of code:

Carrying our own copy of DejaGnu would be crazy.  We override very small 
parts in a very small area of DejaGnu; nothing to do with all the code for 
interacting with many different kinds of targets and remote hosts, for 
example.

> 976K    /usr/share/dejagnu
> 892K    /home/manuel/src/trunk/gcc/testsuite/lib/

If you will compare an SVN checkout of GCC with duplicates of all files to 
an installation of DejaGnu with no duplicates, expect biased results.

Almost all of gcc/testsuite/lib/ is entirely specific to the GCC 
testsuites; the largest file is target-supports.exp, for example, which is 
entirely specific to the tests in the GCC testsuites and the different 
sets of targets particular GCC tests are applicable to.  (Unfortunately, 
core DejaGnu also has a lot of code that would better either be in 
individual toolchain testsuites, or not exist at all: code telling one bit 
of the toolchain how to find another bit in a build tree, when instead 
testing should be run with an installation to a staging directory so the 
built-in relocation support in the tools would suffice.)

> There doesn't seem so much upstream activity. If we wait for upstream,
> we are just saying that we will wait forever. The C testsuite would
> still be unable to distinguish between warning/error/notes/random
> output.

My experience is that DejaGnu upstream handles patches promptly and is 
easy to deal with; a lack of upstream activity simply indicates a mature 
project that doesn't *need* much changing.  If a new DejaGnu release would 
be of use for GCC, I don't suppose it would be hard to get one made.  We 
may put temporary workarounds in the GCC code to support working with 
older DejaGnu, but being part of the GNU project means working together 
with other parts of the GNU project, and putting fixes in DejaGnu if 
that's the logically right place, as well as possibly putting workarounds 
for unfixed DejaGnu in GCC.  Handling of the standard GCS formats for 
column numbers and location ranges is obviously useful for core DejaGnu.  
I am not saying "wait for upstream", but "send a patch to upstream and 
work with the DejaGnu maintainers to get it integrated and a new release 
made".

-- 
Joseph S. Myers
joseph@codesourcery.com

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