This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: fix kennerism
- From: kenner at vlsi1 dot ultra dot nyu dot edu (Richard Kenner)
- To: jakub at redhat dot com
- Cc: gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Sun, 30 Dec 01 17:52:40 EST
- Subject: Re: fix kennerism
Unless your machine is very slow, it can manage two bootstraps/two
regression testins overnight, so you can update your tree, check if
your patches still apply, run a script with bootstrap/make check on
the unmodified CVS, patches application and second bootstrap/make
check (in a different obj tree, so you can see everything in the
I don't follow. The issue isn't changes that occured *before* the test
starts, since I run with those, but changes that occur between when the
test starts and the commit is done.
I don't see what the two runs proposed above accomplishes (or actually
even what the second run *is*), but I see a real disadvantage of having
more than one tree, which is the significant potential of getting confused
as to what state each tree is in.
I'm a big fan of KISS: the more complex the procedure, the higher the chances
of procedural errors. And there's only so much you win with automation:
"To err is human, but to really mess up requires a computer."