This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: RFH - Testing targets for the switch to C++
- From: Joel Sherrill <joel dot sherrill at oarcorp dot com>
- To: Diego Novillo <dnovillo at google dot com>, gcc <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Sat, 7 Apr 2012 15:09:14 -0500
- Subject: Re: RFH - Testing targets for the switch to C++
For *-rtems* all test results are cross with tests run on simulators. We use a native compiler bulit from the same source for testing. Newlib is the C library and built at the same time.
Do we need to enable any special flags from our existing configure?
FWIW we have a few targets where the simulator is limited in memory and many tests fail. These get rejected because the mail message is too large. If someone is willing to help us trim things so the known failures get skipped, it would be appreciated. We would report more. :)
Diego Novillo <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>On Sat, Apr 7, 2012 at 13:15, Marc Glisse <email@example.com> wrote:
>> I would expect most problems to be related to the host, and more
>> specifically the compiler used to initiate the build, not so much the
>> target. Or is this aiming specifically for targets that only get
>> cross-compilers and thus don't have stage 2 and haven't been tested with a
>> C++ compiler yet?
>You are right that it is mainly an issue for the host. But some of
>the target code gets only exposed when building for that target, and I
>figured that the targets reported in gcc-testresults are tested in a
>variety of hosts. Hence my call for help. I want to get as much
>testing variety as possible.
>> For build issues with other compilers, 50167 and 50177 are still open (last
>> time I looked, I couldn't find the meta-bug about switching to C++ in stage1
>> to add them as blockers).
>Thanks. I will take a look. If there is no meta bug, I'll create one.