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]

Re: PATCH: XFAIL tests that aren't regressions


>>>>> "Franz" == Franz Sirl <Franz.Sirl-kernel@lauterbach.com> writes:

    Franz> Nope, but it is an "obvious fix" and a lot easier than to
    Franz> mess with all the XPASS now. It will take a while until all
    Franz> the port maintainers will update the .x file and will just
    Franz> produce a lot of avoidable noise til then.

Heck, we can just remove the test if it's that annoying.  

The 3.0 branch has only one purpose: get the release done.  We don't
need to have truth and beauty there -- just efficacy.  Of course, if
they coincide, that's good.  And we do want truth and beauty for the
mainline, so a lot of times getting a patch that works both places
means doing the truthful beautiful thing, which is fine too.

The point is that I don't want end-users to see FAILs, and I do want
them to be able to do `make check' to verify their installation, but
beyond that we don't really need to care about the testsuite on the
branch.

    Franz> I still vote for both :-) OK? ;-)

No, not yet. :-)

--
Mark Mitchell                   mark@codesourcery.com
CodeSourcery, LLC               http://www.codesourcery.com


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