Volunteer for bug summaries?

[Jan-Benedict Glaw]

On Wed, 2007-05-23 10:02:02 -0700, Joe Buck <Joe.Buck@synopsys.COM> wrote:
> The Bugzilla field is just a string, so it's possible to put a
> range there as well as a single number.  The mathematical form for
> an open/closed range could be used:
> 
> (working_rev,failing_rev]
> 
> to indicate that the "bad" revision is > working_rev and <= failing_rev.
> 
> A volunteer who builds the compiler once a day can easily fill in
> this kind of range when a failure shows up on a given day that wasn't
> present the previous day.

This is only true for those bugs that already show up with exitsing
testcases.  New bugs won't get caught by this.

However...  If not only a gcc for the local system is built, but also
a full canadian cross, it's possible that at least some extra-bugs
show (in the form of an ICE.)  Eg. I get that often enough for the
vax-linux-uclibc target...

MfG, JBG

-- 
      Jan-Benedict Glaw      jbglaw@lug-owl.de              +49-172-7608481
Signature of:            http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~sgtatham/bugs.html
the second  :
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc/attachments/20070523/1ab57029/attachment.sig>