This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [PATCH 1/4][libbacktrace] Test check_PROGRAMS without mmap
- From: "Ian Lance Taylor via gcc-patches" <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- To: Tom de Vries <tdevries at suse dot de>
- Cc: gcc-patches <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>, Ian Lance Taylor <ian at airs dot com>
- Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2018 06:45:19 -0800
- Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4][libbacktrace] Test check_PROGRAMS without mmap
- References: <20181122123541.GA2333@delia> <20181123204724.GA1927@delia> <CAKOQZ8xPHs4DhA4AGWd+Poehdsh7dYekfjbFqP8r1JBQp2EpzA@mail.gmail.com> <781e6797-8ba1-4fe9-1fc4-3c8655cde55b@suse.de>
- Reply-to: Ian Lance Taylor <iant at google dot com>
>> As far as I know libbacktrace does not currently rely on using GNU
>> make. I'd rather not add that dependency for this purpose (I don't
>> mind adding this kind of testing but to me this seems only of mild
>> interest--I expect that all significant libbacktrace users have mmap).
>> You should be able to write something like
>>
>> libbacktrace_alloc_la_SOURCES = $(libbacktrace_SOURCES)
>> libbacktrace_alloc_la_LIBADD = $(BACKTRACE_FILE) $(FORMAT_FILE) read.c alloc.c
>>
>
> Done.
>
>> Then I wouldn't bother with only running the tests with HAVE_MMAP,
>> just add unconditional tests for btest_alloc, etc. It's OK to run
>> duplicate tests for the incredibly rare case of a host that doesn't
>> support mmap.
>
> Done.
>
> OK for trunk?
This is OK. (I assume the tests pass).
Thanks.
Ian