Re: PATCH: Run V3 tests on installed compiler

[Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery dot com>]

Benjamin Kosnik wrote:

> In practice, how do you pass a list of just files in say
> testsuite_27/basic_istream? Or testsuite/tr1? Or testsuite/ext? 

You can use:

runtest --tool libstdc++ normal.exp=`find $srcdir/17_intro -name *.cc`

or:

runtest --tool libstdc++ normal.exp=`cat testsuite_files`

(I just tried this with a "testsuite_files" that contained just a few 
tests, and it worked fine.)

This the same procedure that you can use elsewhere in the compiler; it's 
the normal DejaGNU way of doing things.  I think that if we can make the 
V3 testsuite work more like the other testsuites, without making it 
harder for you to do development, then that's a win.

> http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/libstdc++/test.html
>
> Please bother to read it before complete changing things underneath our
> feet, without warning. If you're changing current practice, please
> update this doc at the same time.

OK.  If you do not ask me to revert my patch, I will update that 
document to use the example above to show how to feed the contents 
testsuite_files into DejaGNU.

I'm also surprised in that there was no negative reaction to Geoff's 
patch, other than the technical problem that it didn't work with 
multilibs.  I didn't see any indication that the V3 maintainers were 
unhappy with the concept.

> A way to repair the damage would be to keep the testsuite_files makefile
> rules, not have it run by default, and *if this files exists* (ie
> maintainers have run the make rule) use it for the files, if not
> generate dynamically. That would allow library maintainers to keep this
> more efficient workflow, and allow you to test install as well.

To be clear, the rules are still there, and are in fact still run by 
default.  I wonder if the fact that my initial message was unclear about 
what was actually checked in vis a vis what I'd like to do in future has 
muddled the situation so badly that you're not able to discern what's 
actually happened?

Your plan would work too, but rather than having DejaGNU look for the 
file, I think it would be technically better to have the user use the 
normal DejaGNU mechanisms for selecting which tests to run.  Perhaps, we 
could put the logic you're looking for into the Makefile, so that "make 
check-maintainer" automatically passed in testsuite_files, if typing the 
runtest command manually is noxious.  I don't feel very strongly about 
this; if you think its vital that DejaGNU look for the file, I'll make 
that change ASAP.

--
Mark Mitchell
CodeSourcery, LLC
mark@codesourcery.com
(916) 791-8304