public inbox for binutils@sourceware.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "H. J. Lu" <hjl@lucon.org>
To: Nick Clifton <nickc@redhat.com>
Cc: binutils@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: PATCH: Test the just built windres/dlltool only
Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2005 05:37:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20050223195934.GA31293@lucon.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <421C93D5.5080309@redhat.com>

On Wed, Feb 23, 2005 at 02:31:49PM +0000, Nick Clifton wrote:
> Hi H. J.
> 
> >>But by this argument, your patch ought to be extended to all of the 
> >>programs checked in the default.exp file, not just windres and dlltool.
> 
> >windres and dlltool are only enabled for certain targets. It isn't
> >impossible that I have windres or dlltool in PATH for entirely
> >different purposes. I asked for windres nor dlltool not to be
> >built. It is kind of odd for "make check" to check my windres or
> >dlltool behind my back.
> 
> I agree - especially if "make check" is going to check in-build-tree 
> versions of the other commands.  It certainly ought to be consistent, 
> either checking all in-build-tree commands or all in-installed-tree 
> commands.  The point I was making was that your patch appeared to be 
> treating windres and dlltool as special cases when really this ought to 
> be an all or nothing approach as to which tools are tested.
> 
> >But I don't think it is the best way to test the installed binutils.
> >Have you tried to test the installed binutils in the build directory?
> 
> Err well I do not install binaries into a build directory, I install 
> them into a completely separate directory.  But I have tested installed 
> binaries that were created from a build tree.  (Usually because there is 
> a bug in the install process somewhere and I want the testsuite to help 
> me track down the problem).
> 
> >Can you can show me how my patch prevents you from testing the
> >installed binutils?
> 
> Sure, try this:
> 
>   * Build a mingw32-pe targeted toolchain (including gcc).
>   * Install at least gcc and the binutils somewhere.
>   * Go to the binutils build directory and run "make check".  You will 
> test the built executables in the build directory.  Save the 
> binutils.log for later comparison.
>   * Then run "make clean" to get rid of the built executables and add 
> the installed bin directory to your search path.  Rerun "make check". 
> You will test the installed executables using the build directory as a 
> test framework.  Save the binutils.log again.  It should be essentially 
> the same as the results from the in-build-tree test.
>   * Now apply your patch to default.exp and rerun the "make check". 
> This time the installed windres and dlltool will not be tested.
> 

I put the following commands in my ~/.dejagnurc. I don't have to do
"make clean" to test the installed binutils. If anything goes wrong,
I don't have to do a "make" again.


H.J.
----
set AR ar
set ar ar
set AS as
set as as
set NM nm
set NM nm
set DLLTOOL dlltool
set dlltool dlltool
set LD ld
set ld ld
set OBJCOPY objcopy
set objcopy objcopy
set OBJDUMP objdump
set objdump objdump
set READELF readelf
set readelf readelf
set SIZE size
set size size
set STRIP strip
set strip strip
set WINDRES windres
set windres windres

      reply	other threads:[~2005-02-23 19:59 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2005-02-21  8:37 H. J. Lu
2005-02-21  9:59 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2005-02-21 10:29   ` H. J. Lu
2005-02-21 20:38     ` Nick Clifton
2005-02-21 21:09       ` H. J. Lu
2005-02-22 19:23         ` Nick Clifton
2005-02-23  2:26           ` H. J. Lu
2005-02-23 16:11             ` Nick Clifton
2005-02-24  5:37               ` H. J. Lu [this message]

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20050223195934.GA31293@lucon.org \
    --to=hjl@lucon.org \
    --cc=binutils@sources.redhat.com \
    --cc=nickc@redhat.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).