Re: ACATS & GCC testsuite

[Laurent Guerby <guerby at acm dot org>]

On Fri, 2003-03-28 at 01:03, Geert Bosch wrote:
> On Thursday, Mar 27, 2003, at 17:34 America/New_York, Laurent Guerby 
> wrote:
> > I know that the version of GNAT based on 3.2 delivered to customers
> > fixes the 40 or so ACATS tests failing in the current
> > public CVS (since I'm an ACT customer, but I also
> > know it has other problems :).
> 
> In the last few weeks (since the beta-release you speak about), we
> have taken the following steps to contributing our GNAT changes to
> the FSF GCC tree, and be able to do this on a more regular basis in
> the future:
> 
>    - Put into place infrastructure that allows us to develop
>      GNAT on the GCC HEAD branch in parallel with the last stable
>      release version
> 
>    - Updated front end / back end interface as required for the
>      extensive changes made in this area since GCC 3.2
> 
>    - Merged in changes made to FSF tree with ACT changes, and
>      adapted our procedures to match those used by rest of GCC
>      project (no $Revision lines in headers, for example)
> 
>    - Checked in two bug fixes for the back end, which are required
>      by the Ada sources we are contributing

Great news!

> We are now at the stage that we can successfully bootstrap the
> latest GCC with the latest GNAT sources. The tasks to be completed
> in the coming weeks are the following:
> 
>    - Porting remaining back end patches against GCC 3.2.2 that could not
>      go into that release to current GCC
> 
>    - Merging in our changes of GNAT back into the FSF repository
>
> These last two action items will be done in parallel and first Ada
> patches will go in this week. The makefiles are the biggest challenge
> for this last item. Problems with setting up the GCC test suite
> (see my message in http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2003-03/msg01134.html)
> are holding up integrating the back end patches.

I'm not sure why autogen is needed for testing, the
only thing you need is dejagnu and then "make -k check"
just works. (I have dejagnu-1.4.2-6 on my RedHat 8.0 machine).

gcc/configure has the following line:

    echo "configure generated by autoconf version 2.13"


> > Integrated ACATS testing has zero interest
> > until there are effective interactions between the ACT tree
> > and the public tree, see Richard Kenner's response
> > to my request on wether ACT outsiders could help
> > chasing Ada regressions (answer: no, total waste
> > of volunteer time).
> 
> I'm not sure which message you're paraphrasing here, but I'm sure
> there must be a miscommunication here. It is of course extremely
> valuable if any regressions are caught when they occur!

http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2003-01/msg01299.html

I did trace some of them for a while, but none of my emails
were answered, and there was no point in answering them
after N>10 monthes of desynchronization between the
public and GCC tree :). 

http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2002-12/msg00972.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2002-12/msg00969.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2003-01/msg01285.html

> > I'm currently spending my limited free time on other projects
> > but will be happy to resume my efforts when it's useful.
> 
> I think it would be very useful to have ACATS testing
> capability for GCC at any time. If you prefer to wait
> until after sources have been merged, so we'll start out with
> few or no failures, that is fine. However, having regression
> tests is useful at any point. If we have 40 failures now, it
> may indeed not make sense for volunteers to go hunt at them
> at this point while ACT is working on integrating the fixes,
> but if any new failures occur they represent real regressions.

Agreed. That will be very nice to start with zero regression
on the Ada side. 

One thing I need to check is the modification made to ACATS
by ACT if any. Could you send me the following ACATS
configuration files that should have been customized by ACT:

macro.dfs
fcndecl.ada
impdef.a
impdefc.a
impdefd.a
impdefe.a
impdefg.a
impdefh.a

I have my own versions made a while ago, but I believe
impdefc.a must have changed since my setup doesn't
work any more (generation of interrupt).

(Alternatively, you can send me the raw ACT ACATS scripts and files I'll
figure out the needed part and check with ACT if
I spot things that shouldn't be published).

> il to Geert and Robert on the topic (ada/5909) was
> > sent one month ago, without reply unless I missed it.
> 
> While I try to keep up with all GCC mail, I think I must have missed
> your message. I just checked ada/5909 and don't see your message there
> either, so could you resend it? If you don't receive a reply on a
> message within a week or so, please ping me again.

Resent privately (this was a private message with
essentially the same content as my previous one
on gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org).

-- 
Laurent Guerby <guerby at acm dot org>