This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: dejagnu version update?
- From: Jeff Law <law at redhat dot com>
- To: Ramana Radhakrishnan <ramana dot radhakrishnan at foss dot arm dot com>, Mike Stump <mikestump at comcast dot net>, Andreas Schwab <schwab at suse dot de>
- Cc: Bernhard Reutner-Fischer <rep dot dot dot nop at gmail dot com>, David Malcolm <dmalcolm at redhat dot com>, gcc-patches List <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>, GCC Development <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2015 10:36:47 -0600
- Subject: Re: dejagnu version update?
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <1441916913-11547-1-git-send-email-dmalcolm at redhat dot com> <1441916913-11547-3-git-send-email-dmalcolm at redhat dot com> <55F720E6 dot 7020709 at redhat dot com> <4CB1399A-23A6-44F7-A25F-ECBD953E03A0 at gmail dot com> <55F74C3D dot 50504 at redhat dot com> <F5F4A096-2DD7-4635-9CB2-5A611247D71F at comcast dot net> <1B14D92A-0476-416B-A80D-A3083383C48D at gmail dot com> <55F879CB dot 2090607 at redhat dot com> <16565ACE-A56C-4971-BEA9-B299C9B40346 at comcast dot net> <mvmfv2eesa5 dot fsf at hawking dot suse dot de> <2BAFA587-8192-495C-B98C-BDA442B1A8A6 at comcast dot net> <55F997E3 dot 7030508 at foss dot arm dot com>
On 09/16/2015 10:25 AM, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote:
That should work -- certainly that's the way we used to do things at
Cygnus. Some of that code may have bitrotted as single tree builds have
fallen out-of-favor through the years.
On 16/09/15 17:14, Mike Stump wrote:
On Sep 16, 2015, at 12:29 AM, Andreas Schwab <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Mike Stump <email@example.com> writes:
The software presently works with 1.4.4 and there aren’t any
changes that require anything newer.
SLES 12 has 1.4.4.
Would be nice to cover them as well, but their update schedule, 3-4
years, means that their next update is 2018. They didn’t update to
a 3 year old stable release of dejagnu for their last OS, meaning
they are on a > 7 year update cycle. I love embedded and really
long term support cycles (20 years), but, don’t think we should
cater to the 20 year cycle just yet. :-) Since 7 is substantially
longer than 2, I don’t think we should worry about it. If they had
updated at the time, they would have had 3 years of engineering and
testing before the release and _had_ 1.5.
Sorry about the obvious (possibly dumb) question.
Can't we just import a copy of dejagnu each year and install it as
part of the source tree ? I can't imagine installing dejagnu is
adding a huge amount of time to build and regression test time ?
Advantage is that everyone is guaranteed to be on the same version. I
fully expect resistance due to specific issues with specific versions
of tcl and expect, but if folks aren't aware of this .....
As to whether or not its a good idea. I'm torn -- I don't like copying
code from other repos because of the long term maintenance concerns.
I'd rather just move to 1.5 and get on with things. If some systems
don't have a new enough version, I'm comfortable telling developers on
those platforms that they need to update. It's not like every *user*
needs dejagnu, it's just for the testing side of things.