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] | |
On Wed, 2007-05-23 10:02:02 -0700, Joe Buck <Joe.Buck@synopsys.COM> wrote:
> The Bugzilla field is just a string, so it's possible to put a
> range there as well as a single number. The mathematical form for
> an open/closed range could be used:
>
> (working_rev,failing_rev]
>
> to indicate that the "bad" revision is > working_rev and <= failing_rev.
>
> A volunteer who builds the compiler once a day can easily fill in
> this kind of range when a failure shows up on a given day that wasn't
> present the previous day.
This is only true for those bugs that already show up with exitsing
testcases. New bugs won't get caught by this.
However... If not only a gcc for the local system is built, but also
a full canadian cross, it's possible that at least some extra-bugs
show (in the form of an ICE.) Eg. I get that often enough for the
vax-linux-uclibc target...
MfG, JBG
--
Jan-Benedict Glaw jbglaw@lug-owl.de +49-172-7608481
Signature of: http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~sgtatham/bugs.html
the second :
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
| Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
|---|---|---|
| Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |