Re: btest-gcc.sh patch ping and Re: Link tests after GCC_NO_EXECUTABLES

[Richard Sandiford <rsandifo@nildram.co.uk>]

Hans-Peter Nilsson <hp@bitrange.com> writes:
> On Fri, 30 Nov 2007, Rask Ingemann Lambertsen wrote:
>> On Thu, Nov 29, 2007 at 10:05:54PM +0000, Richard Sandiford wrote:
>>
>> > Even though current mainline can build libgfortran, all tests fail for
>> > simulator testing, and I'm not sure whether you could get it work for
>> > bare-metal boards or not.
>
> Richard, I don't know when you tested; either you're telling
> history or you're more updated, see PR21185 track for my
> datestamp.

Hmm.  Are you talking about mips*-elf or cris-elf?  The context
was snipped in the message you replied to, but I was only talking
about mips*-elf when I said the above.  FWIW, the full quote was:

    http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-11/msg01668.html
    Applying this patch would revert to the previous situation of
    libgfortran being unbuildable for mips*-elf*.  That's not a regression
    from previous releases, and I'm not sure how useful the status quo is.
    Even though current mainline can build libgfortran, all tests fail for
    simulator testing, and I'm not sure whether you could get it work for
    bare-metal boards or not.  It sounds like we've agreed that, if we want
    to support libgfortran on targets like mips*-elf*, we should use
    libstd++-like with_newlib checks there too.

(Even mips*-elf was probably too general, since now I think about it,
I probably only tried running the gfortran testsuite on 64-bit targets.
So many different configurations...)

And I haven't yet looked at why the tests are failing.  I was just noting
that they did.  It looks from PR21185 that Rask was seeing the same thing
on mipsisa64-elf, and TBH, I was so unsurprised that they were failing that
I hadn't even realised it was _supposed_ to work now.  I'll have a prod.

But yeah, it's clear from the PR that you and Rask have already done a
lot of work on this, and that you both know far more about it than I do.
I only really entered the thread because Mark asked me a direct question.
Given which, it would probably be best if I bowed out here.

Thanks to Rask for all the work he's done on this.

Richard