This is the mail archive of the gcc@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]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: R: Status and rationale for toplevel bootstrap (was Re: Example of debugging GCC with toplevel bootstrap)

From: Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr at cs dot tamu dot edu>
To: Marcin Dalecki <martin at dalecki dot de>
Cc: Bonzini Paolo <paolo dot bonzini at lu dot unisi dot ch>, "Eric Botcazou" <ebotcazou at libertysurf dot fr>, <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>, <jason at redhat dot com>, <kenner at vlsi1 dot ultra dot nyu dot edu>
Date: 14 Jan 2006 19:27:16 -0600
Subject: Re: R: Status and rationale for toplevel bootstrap (was Re: Example of debugging GCC with toplevel bootstrap)
References: <5DAF847A2991A941AAF96F8E7261E0A9318088@usi05.usilu.net> <200601141443.28634.ebotcazou@libertysurf.fr> <5DAF847A2991A941AAF96F8E7261E0A931808A@usi05.usilu.net> <3096439D-7317-492E-93B8-3E47218542B8@dalecki.de>

Marcin Dalecki <martin@dalecki.de> writes:

| Testing the resulting compiler has already a name:
| 
| make test

That does not test the compiler on building the runtime.  
There are a number of times where people reported runtime buik
failures after front-end changes.  So, I don't think your statement is
accurate. 

-- Gaby

References:
- Status and rationale for toplevel bootstrap (was Re: Example of debugging GCC with toplevel bootstrap)
  - From: Bonzini Paolo
- Re: Status and rationale for toplevel bootstrap (was Re: Example of debugging GCC with toplevel bootstrap)
  - From: Eric Botcazou
- R: Status and rationale for toplevel bootstrap (was Re: Example of debugging GCC with toplevel bootstrap)
  - From: Bonzini Paolo
- Re: R: Status and rationale for toplevel bootstrap (was Re: Example of debugging GCC with toplevel bootstrap)
  - From: Marcin Dalecki

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