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: [PATCH] Clean up tests where a later dg-do completely overrides another.

From: Jeff Law <law at redhat dot com>
To: vogt at linux dot vnet dot ibm dot com, Rainer Orth <ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld dot DE>, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, Andreas Krebbel <krebbel at linux dot vnet dot ibm dot com>
Date: Wed, 18 May 2016 15:59:20 -0600
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Clean up tests where a later dg-do completely overrides another.
Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
References: <20160427075023 dot GA5082 at linux dot vnet dot ibm dot com> <ydd7ffgqj1f dot fsf at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld dot DE> <20160429235606 dot GA11689 at linux dot vnet dot ibm dot com> <b0d3e0ce-7edd-6f7b-7e42-5a7518806ea9 at redhat dot com> <20160502162413 dot GA5098 at linux dot vnet dot ibm dot com>

On 05/02/2016 10:24 AM, Dominik Vogt wrote:

On Mon, May 02, 2016 at 09:29:50AM -0600, Jeff Law wrote:

On 04/29/2016 05:56 PM, Dominik Vogt wrote:

...
Maybe a comment should be added to the test case

 /* If this test is *run* (not just compiled) and therefore fails
    on non sh*-targets, this is because of a bug older DejaGnu
    versions.  This is fixed with DejaGnu-1.6.  */

I think we have a couple issues now that are resolved if we step
forward to a newer version of dejagnu.

Given dejagnu-1.6 was recently released, should we just bite the
bullet and ask everyone to step forward?


I'm all for that.  I've recently added s390 test cases that
require Dejagnu 1.6.  Apart from the discussed problem with
spec-options.c, there are a number of Power (and some other
target) test cases that do not work properly with older Dejagnu
version but would finally work (read: actually test something) if
the new version were required.

FWIW, Fedora 24 uses dejagnu-1.6.  Not sure about other distributions.

jeff

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [PATCH] Clean up tests where a later dg-do completely overrides another.
  - From: Mike Stump
- Re: [PATCH] Clean up tests where a later dg-do completely overrides another.
  - From: Gerald Pfeifer

References:
- Re: [PATCH] Clean up tests where a later dg-do completely overrides another.
  - From: Jeff Law
- Re: [PATCH] Clean up tests where a later dg-do completely overrides another.
  - From: Dominik Vogt

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