This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: PATCH: Two C regressions in GCC 3.4.
"Joseph S. Myers" <email@example.com> writes:
> > (I ran into a couple of these building FC2 with the tree-ssa branch and had
> > queued them for reinvestigation).
> It's clear a regression tester doing this sort of thing (building
> distributions and reporting changes in what builds or diagnostics) would
> be of value to see what a patch breaks (or how useful a new diagnostic in
> -Wall is on real code, or how frequent some deprecated usage is) so it can
> then be judged at the time whether the breakage is correct (broken
> software) or incorrect (broken GCC) rather than maybe some time later.
> But I guess the resource requirements for doing such builds frequently
> enough would be rather too large.
I have machines which sit around and do nothing but run Seti@Home.
I'm sure there are others in the same boat. I would be happy to have
those machines regularly build packages with compiler snapshots. They
wouldn't report back too often, but I suppose that even getting a
report once every couple of weeks would help.
However, since this is not a big interest of mine, I'm not too likely
to write the scripts for it myself. But I'm willing to help out if
somebody else starts such a project going.