* [PATCH] contrib: Fill in HOST{CC,CFLAGS,CXX,CXXFLAGS} in test_installed
@ 2024-02-05 13:50 Jakub Jelinek
2024-02-05 16:07 ` Jeff Law
2024-02-06 5:12 ` Alexandre Oliva
0 siblings, 2 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Jakub Jelinek @ 2024-02-05 13:50 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Alexandre Oliva, Rainer Orth, Mike Stump; +Cc: gcc-patches
Hi!
gcc/Makefile.in since my r0-60234 change fills in HOSTCC and HOSTCFLAGS
in site.exp and since r8-671 also HOSTCXX and HOSTCXXFLAGS.
If those variables aren't set, we get errors like:
/usr/src/gcc/contrib/test_installed --without-g++ --without-gfortran --without-objc struct-layout-1.exp
...
ERROR: tcl error sourcing /usr/src/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/compat/struct-layout-1.exp.
ERROR: tcl error code TCL LOOKUP VARNAME HOSTCC
ERROR: can't read "HOSTCC": no such variable
while executing
"remote_exec build "$HOSTCC $HOSTCFLAGS $generator_cmd""
(file "/usr/src/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/compat/struct-layout-1.exp" line 96)
invoked from within
"source /usr/src/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/compat/struct-layout-1.exp"
("uplevel" body line 1)
invoked from within
"uplevel #0 source /usr/src/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/compat/struct-layout-1.exp"
invoked from within
"catch "uplevel #0 source $test_file_name" msg"
(similarly in g++ or gfortran) struct-layout-1.exp. One doesn't need to
test specially for just struct-layout-1.exp alone, just not using any arg
will trigger it as well, just later.
The following patch fills it in as cc and c++ with empty flags to compile
those, I believe that is what e.g. make uses by default, so it should be a
reasonable default. We IMHO shouldn't default to GCC_UNDER_TEST because
that might be a cross-compiler etc.
Ok for trunk?
2024-02-05 Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>
* test_installed: Fill in HOSTCC, HOSTCXX, HOSTCFLAGS and
HOSTCXXFLAGS.
--- contrib/test_installed.jj 2024-01-03 11:51:20.865879222 +0100
+++ contrib/test_installed 2024-02-05 14:36:03.625047250 +0100
@@ -114,6 +114,10 @@ set GCC_UNDER_TEST "${GCC_UNDER_TEST-${p
set GXX_UNDER_TEST "${GXX_UNDER_TEST-${prefix}${prefix+/bin/}g++}"
set GFORTRAN_UNDER_TEST "${GFORTRAN_UNDER_TEST-${prefix}${prefix+/bin/}gfortran}"
set OBJC_UNDER_TEST "${OBJC_UNDER_TEST-${prefix}${prefix+/bin/}gcc}"
+set HOSTCC "${HOSTCC-cc}"
+set HOSTCXX "${HOSTCXX-c++}"
+set HOSTCFLAGS ""
+set HOSTCXXFLAGS ""
EOF
if test x${target} != x; then
echo "set target_triplet $target" >> site.exp
Jakub
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] contrib: Fill in HOST{CC,CFLAGS,CXX,CXXFLAGS} in test_installed
2024-02-05 13:50 [PATCH] contrib: Fill in HOST{CC,CFLAGS,CXX,CXXFLAGS} in test_installed Jakub Jelinek
@ 2024-02-05 16:07 ` Jeff Law
2024-02-06 5:12 ` Alexandre Oliva
1 sibling, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Jeff Law @ 2024-02-05 16:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jakub Jelinek, Alexandre Oliva, Rainer Orth, Mike Stump; +Cc: gcc-patches
On 2/5/24 06:50, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> gcc/Makefile.in since my r0-60234 change fills in HOSTCC and HOSTCFLAGS
> in site.exp and since r8-671 also HOSTCXX and HOSTCXXFLAGS.
> If those variables aren't set, we get errors like:
> /usr/src/gcc/contrib/test_installed --without-g++ --without-gfortran --without-objc struct-layout-1.exp
> ...
> ERROR: tcl error sourcing /usr/src/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/compat/struct-layout-1.exp.
> ERROR: tcl error code TCL LOOKUP VARNAME HOSTCC
> ERROR: can't read "HOSTCC": no such variable
> while executing
> "remote_exec build "$HOSTCC $HOSTCFLAGS $generator_cmd""
> (file "/usr/src/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/compat/struct-layout-1.exp" line 96)
> invoked from within
> "source /usr/src/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/compat/struct-layout-1.exp"
> ("uplevel" body line 1)
> invoked from within
> "uplevel #0 source /usr/src/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/compat/struct-layout-1.exp"
> invoked from within
> "catch "uplevel #0 source $test_file_name" msg"
>
> (similarly in g++ or gfortran) struct-layout-1.exp. One doesn't need to
> test specially for just struct-layout-1.exp alone, just not using any arg
> will trigger it as well, just later.
>
> The following patch fills it in as cc and c++ with empty flags to compile
> those, I believe that is what e.g. make uses by default, so it should be a
> reasonable default. We IMHO shouldn't default to GCC_UNDER_TEST because
> that might be a cross-compiler etc.
>
> Ok for trunk?
>
> 2024-02-05 Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>
>
> * test_installed: Fill in HOSTCC, HOSTCXX, HOSTCFLAGS and
> HOSTCXXFLAGS.
Ugh. test_installed :( Probably a necessary evil, though I suspect few
people are using it. So if it works for the scenarios you're testing,
then OK by me.
jeff
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] contrib: Fill in HOST{CC,CFLAGS,CXX,CXXFLAGS} in test_installed
2024-02-05 13:50 [PATCH] contrib: Fill in HOST{CC,CFLAGS,CXX,CXXFLAGS} in test_installed Jakub Jelinek
2024-02-05 16:07 ` Jeff Law
@ 2024-02-06 5:12 ` Alexandre Oliva
1 sibling, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Alexandre Oliva @ 2024-02-06 5:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jakub Jelinek; +Cc: Rainer Orth, Mike Stump, gcc-patches
On Feb 5, 2024, Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com> wrote:
> * test_installed: Fill in HOSTCC, HOSTCXX, HOSTCFLAGS and
> HOSTCXXFLAGS.
LGTM, thanks,
--
Alexandre Oliva, happy hacker https://FSFLA.org/blogs/lxo/
Free Software Activist GNU Toolchain Engineer
Disinformation flourishes because many people care deeply about injustice but
very few check the facts. Think Assange & Stallman. The empires strike back
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2024-02-06 5:12 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2024-02-05 13:50 [PATCH] contrib: Fill in HOST{CC,CFLAGS,CXX,CXXFLAGS} in test_installed Jakub Jelinek
2024-02-05 16:07 ` Jeff Law
2024-02-06 5:12 ` Alexandre Oliva
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).