Re: [Ping][PATCH, libstdc++-v3] Enable to cross-test libstdc++ on simulator

Re: [Ping][PATCH, libstdc++-v3] Enable to cross-test libstdc++ on simulator

[Jonathan Wakely]

On 7 March 2012 05:22, Terry Guo wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Can anybody please review and approve the following simple patch? Thanks
> very much.
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/libstdc++/2011-08/msg00063.html

I'll test it on x86_64-linux as soon as trunk is able to build again.

Re: [Ping][PATCH, libstdc++-v3] Enable to cross-test libstdc++ on simulator

[Jonathan Wakely]

On 7 March 2012 05:22, Terry Guo wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Can anybody please review and approve the following simple patch? Thanks
> very much.
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/libstdc++/2011-08/msg00063.html

I think this looks OK but I'm not familiar with those details of the
testsuite - do any ARM or other maintainers have any comments?

RE: [Ping][PATCH, libstdc++-v3] Enable to cross-test libstdc++ on simulator

[Terry Guo]

Hi Jonathan,

Thanks for reviewing the patch.

Hi Richard,

Can you please give some comments?

BR,
Terry

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jonathan Wakely [mailto:jwakely.gcc@gmail.com]
> Sent: Sunday, March 11, 2012 7:26 AM
> To: Terry Guo
> Cc: libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; ro@cebitec.uni-
> bielefeld.de; mikestump@comcast.net; Richard Earnshaw; bonzini@gnu.org
> Subject: Re: [Ping][PATCH, libstdc++-v3] Enable to cross-test libstdc++
> on simulator
> 
> On 7 March 2012 05:22, Terry Guo wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > Can anybody please review and approve the following simple patch?
> Thanks
> > very much.
> >
> > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/libstdc++/2011-08/msg00063.html
> 
> I think this looks OK but I'm not familiar with those details of the
> testsuite - do any ARM or other maintainers have any comments?

Re: [Ping][PATCH, libstdc++-v3] Enable to cross-test libstdc++ on simulator

[Mike Stump]

On Mar 10, 2012, at 3:25 PM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On 7 March 2012 05:22, Terry Guo wrote:
>> Hello,
>> 
>> Can anybody please review and approve the following simple patch? Thanks
>> very much.
>> 
>> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/libstdc++/2011-08/msg00063.html

Ok.  Ok for the release branches as relevant, if they are open for changes, after testing.  If you backport it, let it brew for at least a week on trunk before any backports.  Thanks.

Re: [Ping][PATCH, libstdc++-v3] Enable to cross-test libstdc++ on simulator

[Terry Guo]

Hello,

Thanks Paolo Carlini for pointing out that I should put code changes in
Makefile.am. This updated patch addresses this issue. Is it OK to trunk?

BR,
Terry

2012-03-26  Terry Guo  <terry.guo@arm.com>

        * testsuite/Makefile.am (TEST_GCC_EXEC_PREFIX): New.
        * testsuite/Makefile.in: Regenerated.

diff --git a/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/Makefile.am
b/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/Makefile.am
index 166bd16..7094ad5 100644
--- a/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/Makefile.am
+++ b/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/Makefile.am
@@ -60,6 +60,7 @@ site.exp: Makefile
 	@echo 'set libiconv "$(LIBICONV)"' >>site.tmp
 	@echo 'set baseline_dir "$(baseline_dir)"' >> site.tmp
 	@echo 'set baseline_subdir_switch "$(baseline_subdir_switch)"' >>
site.tmp
+	@echo 'set TEST_GCC_EXEC_PREFIX "$(libdir)/gcc/"' >> site.tmp
 	@echo '## All variables above are generated by configure. Do Not
Edit ##' >>site.tmp
 	@test ! -f site.exp || \
 	  sed '1,/^## All variables above are.*##/ d' site.exp >> site.tmp
diff --git a/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/Makefile.in
b/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/Makefile.in
index 8c91fd0..e433bb9 100644
--- a/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/Makefile.in
+++ b/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/Makefile.in
@@ -505,6 +505,7 @@ site.exp: Makefile
 	@echo 'set libiconv "$(LIBICONV)"' >>site.tmp
 	@echo 'set baseline_dir "$(baseline_dir)"' >> site.tmp
 	@echo 'set baseline_subdir_switch "$(baseline_subdir_switch)"' >>
site.tmp
+	@echo 'set TEST_GCC_EXEC_PREFIX "$(libdir)/gcc/"' >> site.tmp
 	@echo '## All variables above are generated by configure. Do Not
Edit ##' >>site.tmp
 	@test ! -f site.exp || \
 	  sed '1,/^## All variables above are.*##/ d' site.exp >> site.tmp

 

Re: [Ping][PATCH, libstdc++-v3] Enable to cross-test libstdc++ on simulator

[Paolo Carlini]

On 03/28/2012 03:15 AM, Terry Guo wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Thanks Paolo Carlini for pointing out that I should put code changes in
> Makefile.am. This updated patch addresses this issue. Is it OK to trunk?
Sure, thanks.

Paolo.

RE: [Ping][PATCH, libstdc++-v3] Enable to cross-test libstdc++ on simulator

[Terry Guo]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Paolo Carlini [mailto:paolo.carlini@oracle.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2012 9:15 AM
> To: Terry Guo
> Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org; ro@CeBiTec.Uni-
> Bielefeld.DE; mikestump@comcast.net; Richard Earnshaw; 'Paolo Bonzini'
> Subject: Re: [Ping][PATCH, libstdc++-v3] Enable to cross-test libstdc++
> on simulator
> 
> On 03/28/2012 03:15 AM, Terry Guo wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > Thanks Paolo Carlini for pointing out that I should put code changes
> in
> > Makefile.am. This updated patch addresses this issue. Is it OK to
> trunk?
> Sure, thanks.
> 

This patch was committed into trunk at March 28. And I just verified that it
also works for gcc 4.7 branch and 4.6 branch. So can I back port it to 4.7
and 4.6 branch?

BR,
Terry

Re: [Ping][PATCH, libstdc++-v3] Enable to cross-test libstdc++ on simulator

[Mike Stump]

On Apr 6, 2012, at 12:50 AM, Terry Guo wrote:
> This patch was committed into trunk at March 28. And I just verified that it
> also works for gcc 4.7 branch and 4.6 branch. So can I back port it to 4.7
> and 4.6 branch?

Ok.  As always please be on the lookout for any problems.

[Ping][PATCH, libstdc++-v3] Enable to cross-test libstdc++ on simulator

[Terry Guo]

Hello,

Can anybody please review and approve the following simple patch? Thanks
very much.

http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/libstdc++/2011-08/msg00063.html

BR,
Terry

Re: [Ping][PATCH, libstdc++-v3] Enable to cross-test libstdc++ on simulator

[Paolo Carlini]

Hi,

On 03/07/2012 06:22 AM, Terry Guo wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Can anybody please review and approve the following simple patch? Thanks
> very much.
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/libstdc++/2011-08/msg00063.html
apparently somebody, somewhere, approved this patch, because I see:

2012-03-13  Terry Guo <terry.guo@arm.com>

     * testsuite/Makefile.in (TEST_GCC_EXEC_PREFIX): New.

but frankly the commit as-is didn't make much sense, because the *.in 
files are generated: a sensible patch should have touched the *.am file 
and then, upon approval, committed also the files change by 'autoreconf'.

Anyway, the change doesn't exist anymore, because the next 'autoreconf' 
(of mine, as it happens) of course wiped it out.

Please clarify.

Thanks,
Paolo.

Re: [Ping][PATCH, libstdc++-v3] Enable to cross-test libstdc++ on simulator

[Paolo Bonzini]

Il 23/03/2012 13:40, Paolo Carlini ha scritto:
> Hi,
> 
> On 03/07/2012 06:22 AM, Terry Guo wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> Can anybody please review and approve the following simple patch? Thanks
>> very much.
>>
>> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/libstdc++/2011-08/msg00063.html
> apparently somebody, somewhere, approved this patch, because I see:
> 
> 2012-03-13  Terry Guo <terry.guo@arm.com>
> 
>     * testsuite/Makefile.in (TEST_GCC_EXEC_PREFIX): New.
> 
> but frankly the commit as-is didn't make much sense, because the *.in
> files are generated: a sensible patch should have touched the *.am file
> and then, upon approval, committed also the files change by 'autoreconf'.

It was approved by Mike Stump who obviously confused the *.in with *.am,
or libstdc++-v3 with gcc.  It happens. :)

The same change done to Makefile.am is of course ok, but you don't need
my approval to install it.

(the other) Paolo

Re: [Ping][PATCH, libstdc++-v3] Enable to cross-test libstdc++ on simulator

[Paolo Carlini]

On 03/23/2012 02:02 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> It was approved by Mike Stump who obviously confused the *.in with *.am,
> or libstdc++-v3 with gcc.  It happens. :)
Good, good, thanks Paolo. The messages on the mailing list aren't fully 
threaded and I didn't see immediately the approval.

And of course it happens, no problem, but then, don't be surprised if 
the change is wiped out by the next 'autoreconf' ;)

Paolo.