Re: GCC 3.3, GCC 3.4

[Phil Edwards <phil at jaj dot com>]

On Fri, Jan 31, 2003 at 11:03:41AM +0000, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
> On Thu, 30 Jan 2003, Benjamin Kosnik wrote:
> 
> > I think the longer gcc, as a project, goes on without an autobuild
> > continuous regression checker, the worse off things will get. It was
> > nice of Red Hat to initially support this effort, but it is obvious that
> > this time is past as the regression checker is long dead. Somebody else
> > will have to step up with the bandwidth, time, and machine to do this.
> 
> The one that Geoff was running at Red Hat is now running at Apple (Darwin 
> native only, rather than one native and two cross).  I think there's also 
> a separate one running on athlon_mp-pc-linux-gnu (look for Autocrasher in 
> the gcc-regression archives).

Yeah, but since "make compare" and "make gnucompare" still don't seem to
be identical (on occasion), it generates false alarms (on occasion).


> However, we do need a simple system for anyone (with a fast enough system) 
> to be able to set up the tester and run it,

I'm putting the finishing touches on an email-based binary search server.
One could send mail such as

 % mail -s 'regression hunt cc1plus 3.3 assemble -O2' foo@foo.foo < PRnnnn.cc

and get back a message saying "It broke somewhere between the 12th and
the 13th."


Phil

-- 
I would therefore like to posit that computing's central challenge, viz. "How
not to make a mess of it," has /not/ been met.
                                                 - Edsger Dijkstra, 1930-2002