This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Non-TFmode targets broken with "[fortran,patch] Complete front-end support for __float128"
- From: Hans-Peter Nilsson <hans-peter dot nilsson at axis dot com>
- To: dewar at adacore dot com
- Cc: fxcoudert at gmail dot com, hans-peter dot nilsson at axis dot com, burnus at net-b dot de, fortran at gcc dot gnu dot org, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2010 15:37:49 +0200
- Subject: Re: Non-TFmode targets broken with "[fortran,patch] Complete front-end support for __float128"
> Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2010 06:57:35 -0400
> From: Robert Dewar <email@example.com>
> FX wrote:
> >> Breaking targets without TFmode, like cris-elf
> > Sorry for breaking bootstraps on (apparently) all targets. I thought
> > I had tested it independently from library support, but apparently I
> > failed to redo so properly after getting rid of the option.
> For GNAT development, we have a backup that catches such situations.
> Everytime a checkin is done, it triggers an instant automatic build
> on a fast machine, runs the test suite and reports back if there are
> any errors. Since this report appears within less than 15 minutes of
> any checkin, it catches most build-breaking mistakes. I wonder if we
> could arrange something like this for gcc checkins.
Which is pretty much what I (and others) have, except it reports
to me instead of e.g. gcc-regression@. (Hm, I guess that's a
hint to myself; I wanted to avoid redundant traffic before there
was such a list and the tester is somewhat more mature now.)
Most hosted targets these days have TFmode anyway, so a
mainstream setup wouldn't have helped much for this particular
FWIW, currently at regress-4 since a few days; two of the
failures not yet analyzed enough for a PR: