This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [buildrobot] microblaze-elf / microblaze-linux
- From: "Joseph S. Myers" <joseph at codesourcery dot com>
- To: Jan-Benedict Glaw <jbglaw at lug-owl dot de>
- Cc: Joern Rennecke <joern dot rennecke at embecosm dot com>, Joel Sherrill <Joel dot Sherrill at oarcorp dot com>, "gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>, Michael Eager <eager at eagercon dot com>
- Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2013 16:52:25 +0000
- Subject: Re: [buildrobot] microblaze-elf / microblaze-linux
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <1djbjk1n62mkaiqxbjm4lo51 dot 1385469317186 at email dot android dot com> <20131126145119 dot GQ30563 at lug-owl dot de> <CAMqJFCqcAz1JD0CyaPNTEh0J6svCRc7rvr8KskOowWtREk34yA at mail dot gmail dot com> <20131126152755 dot GR30563 at lug-owl dot de>
On Tue, 26 Nov 2013, Jan-Benedict Glaw wrote:
> > The idea if config-list.mk is not to build every conceivable target
> > configuration, but to give a reasonable converage of the different
> > target architectures and OS/library configurations so that you can
> > effectively test a patch with unknown target-specific impact.
>
> Is it like that? My impression is/was that people collected a list of
> targets they somewhat care for. With around 200 configurations, among
> them some that are quite similar, adding another just adds 1/2%, which
> I'd call neglectible.
For example, the list should include at least one target for every target
header in GCC. So if there's a header specific to an (architecture, OS)
pair, a matching configuration should be included.
--
Joseph S. Myers
joseph@codesourcery.com