From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 31245 invoked by alias); 5 Jan 2011 20:19:15 -0000 Received: (qmail 31229 invoked by uid 22791); 5 Jan 2011 20:19:15 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,RFC_ABUSE_POST X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail-ww0-f51.google.com (HELO mail-ww0-f51.google.com) (74.125.82.51) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Wed, 05 Jan 2011 20:19:10 +0000 Received: by wwe15 with SMTP id 15so15501294wwe.8 for ; Wed, 05 Jan 2011 12:19:08 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.227.32.137 with SMTP id c9mr545188wbd.208.1294258747789; Wed, 05 Jan 2011 12:19:07 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.2.99] (cpc2-cmbg8-0-0-cust61.5-4.cable.virginmedia.com [82.6.108.62]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id m13sm16222317wbz.3.2011.01.05.12.19.04 (version=SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Wed, 05 Jan 2011 12:19:06 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <4D24D81D.3000304@gmail.com> Date: Wed, 05 Jan 2011 20:24:00 -0000 From: Dave Korn User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.17 (Windows/20080914) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Rainer Orth CC: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, java-patches@gcc.gnu.org, Hans Boehm , Paolo Bonzini , Janis Johnson , Ben Elliston , Ralf Wildenhues Subject: Re: [testsuite, build] Convert boehm-gc testsuite to DejaGnu (PR boehm-gc/11412) References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2011-01/txt/msg00258.txt.bz2 On 05/01/2011 18:06, Rainer Orth wrote: Hi Rainer, > * The primary complication of the boehm-gc testsuite is the > staticroottest testcase, which depends on a shared library. > Currently, libtool is used to build that and I think that's the right > decision rather than duplicating all of libtool's knowledge in > DejaGnu. > > Unfortunately, DejaGnu knows nothing about libtool yet, and I'm still > struggling with the right way to integrate it. For the moment (though > I fear that wrong, over-complicated) I've chosen to add two additional > keywords (ltassemble and ltlink) to match assemble and link, but for > .la, .lo files instead. I'm open for suggestions for better ways to > handle this, though. Perhaps just build it in the makefile, as at present, and make the .la file a dependency of the check target, so that it gets built before starting the testrun? (Or conceivably if worried about it failing to build on some target and that stopping the tests from running, build it using a recursive $(MAKE) invocation, using the "-" prefix to ignore errors?) cheers, DaveK