This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: dejagnu version update?
- From: Segher Boessenkool <segher at kernel dot crashing dot org>
- To: Bernhard Reutner-Fischer <rep dot dot dot nop at gmail dot com>
- Cc: Mike Stump <mikestump at comcast dot net>, Jonathan Wakely <jwakely dot gcc at gmail dot com>, Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>, Jeff Law <law at redhat dot com>, David Malcolm <dmalcolm at redhat dot com>, GCC Patches <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>, GCC Development <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Wed, 8 Aug 2018 11:45:30 -0500
- Subject: Re: dejagnu version update?
- References: <20170513102412.fgwlr6m7bdrrgt5n@nbbrfq.cc.univie.ac.at> <20170513103834.GQ1809@tucnak> <CAH6eHdQGkGn0pYYi_sfroP=qZNV=-BvKk2hjs5MQ-eSS_r+tPQ@mail.gmail.com> <4FE7E284-0A0B-469E-AFF6-3BD1F2E1B431@gmail.com> <CAH6eHdSVQPOV0RQCzy6LKHGX0eh_ckL3LML6SaTLmdqKd-zHqg@mail.gmail.com> <D853A94F-D92B-4520-A5BF-C3A41D898DAA@comcast.net> <CAC1BbcSjSxsptrSiianSAbzzaMFFoA09WQ6J0Kpfih4ZNbbfOw@mail.gmail.com> <3461C647-00AB-4FBC-BE10-0DC5973BFD36@comcast.net> <20180807163428.GG31204@gate.crashing.org> <47A4EF52-26AD-4B95-AE20-B511ED220E4D@gmail.com>
On Wed, Aug 08, 2018 at 01:17:49PM +0200, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer wrote:
> On 7 August 2018 18:34:30 CEST, Segher Boessenkool <segher@kernel.crashing.org> wrote:
> >On Mon, Aug 06, 2018 at 08:25:49AM -0700, Mike Stump wrote:
> >> Since g++ already requires 1.5.3, it make no sense to bump to
> >anything older that 1.5.3, so let's bump to 1.5.3. Those packaging
> >systems and OSes that wanted to update by now, have had their chance to
> >update. Those that punt until we bump the requirement, well, they will
> >now have to bump. :-)
> >
> >"g++ requires it"? In what way? I haven't seen any issues with older
> >dejagnu versions.
>
> I think http://git.savannah.gnu.org/gitweb/?p=dejagnu.git;a=commit;h=5256bd82343000c76bc0e48139003f90b6184347
Ugh.
If there is a conflict between the test-specific options and the testsuite
run options, sometimes you should pick one, sometimes the other, and often
skipping the test is best. Older dejagnu picked the run options, and now
newer dejagnu picks the test-specific options, so now we cannot rely on
*either* behaviour. At least for many years to come: we share most
testcases with older GCC versions, which do not require dejagnu 1.5.3!
What a mess.
Segher