public inbox for gcc@gcc.gnu.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Marc Lehmann <pcg@goof.com>
To: egcs@cygnus.com
Subject: Re: announce: egcs benchmark suite, alpha release
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1999 12:25:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <19990122034201.B24106@cerebro.laendle> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <10961.916612314@hurl.cygnus.com>

On Sun, Jan 17, 1999 at 03:31:54PM -0700, Jeffrey A Law wrote:
> 
>   In message <rzqd84ert0w.fsf@djlvig.dl.ac.uk>you write:
>   > Do the copyright problems for the testsuite apply to this too?  There
>   > are some Fortranesque things we could add, but at least one of was a

At the moment, we have only linpack.f. Contributions are welcome ;) I had to
write a c-wrapper for linpack since I'm fortran illiterate and didn't know
how to interface the c functions properly ;)

>   > candidate of mine the testsuite.
> Not at the current time since we are not planning on distributing the
> benchmarks as part of the compiler.
> 
> However, it would probably be wise to be more careful with the benchmark
> suite than we were with the testsuites.  ie, let's keep track of where the
> code came from at the least so that we'll know its status if we ever want to
> consider including the benchmarks.

At the moment, it looks like this:

all tests in the "tests" subdir are GPL'd, everything else which is free but
not gpl'ed is in the "nongpl" dir.

Every benchmark added to the suite is required to have a SOURCE comment (here
is an example from linpack.f):

c     TEST linpack_f
c     SOURCE http://www.netlib.org/benchmarks/
c     DESC 100x100 linpack, initialization time is also measured
c     CAT fortran
c     END

all of which, btw, should be machine parseable. The worst that could happen
would be to get rid of the nongpl parts.

> It'll also force us to think a little before including something -- where did
> it come from, what are the redistribution terms, are we in compliance with 
> the redistribution terms.

the SOURCE comment can't answer this. I thought about adding a
machine-parsable LICENSE comment or similar, but would this be of any help?
I'd rather create sgi and bsd subdirectories...

(Comments welcome ;)

How about an ASSIGNED keyword indicating wether the tests are assigned,
should the need arise. And an AUTHOR comment?

IF we ever would distribute the benchmark suite (I don't yet see the need to
anyway), we will have to think about the home-grown licenses in the nongpl
dir.

      -----==-                                             |
      ----==-- _                                           |
      ---==---(_)__  __ ____  __       Marc Lehmann      +--
      --==---/ / _ \/ // /\ \/ /       pcg@goof.com      |e|
      -=====/_/_//_/\_,_/ /_/\_\       XX11-RIPE         --+
    The choice of a GNU generation                       |
                                                         |

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID
From: Marc Lehmann <pcg@goof.com>
To: egcs@cygnus.com
Subject: Re: announce: egcs benchmark suite, alpha release
Date: Sun, 31 Jan 1999 23:58:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <19990122034201.B24106@cerebro.laendle> (raw)
Message-ID: <19990131235800.5jiOOAPETLuVbnxsjf7-01ovmC3N3D7-lRc-M7qVXfk@z> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <10961.916612314@hurl.cygnus.com>

On Sun, Jan 17, 1999 at 03:31:54PM -0700, Jeffrey A Law wrote:
> 
>   In message < rzqd84ert0w.fsf@djlvig.dl.ac.uk >you write:
>   > Do the copyright problems for the testsuite apply to this too?  There
>   > are some Fortranesque things we could add, but at least one of was a

At the moment, we have only linpack.f. Contributions are welcome ;) I had to
write a c-wrapper for linpack since I'm fortran illiterate and didn't know
how to interface the c functions properly ;)

>   > candidate of mine the testsuite.
> Not at the current time since we are not planning on distributing the
> benchmarks as part of the compiler.
> 
> However, it would probably be wise to be more careful with the benchmark
> suite than we were with the testsuites.  ie, let's keep track of where the
> code came from at the least so that we'll know its status if we ever want to
> consider including the benchmarks.

At the moment, it looks like this:

all tests in the "tests" subdir are GPL'd, everything else which is free but
not gpl'ed is in the "nongpl" dir.

Every benchmark added to the suite is required to have a SOURCE comment (here
is an example from linpack.f):

c     TEST linpack_f
c     SOURCE http://www.netlib.org/benchmarks/
c     DESC 100x100 linpack, initialization time is also measured
c     CAT fortran
c     END

all of which, btw, should be machine parseable. The worst that could happen
would be to get rid of the nongpl parts.

> It'll also force us to think a little before including something -- where did
> it come from, what are the redistribution terms, are we in compliance with 
> the redistribution terms.

the SOURCE comment can't answer this. I thought about adding a
machine-parsable LICENSE comment or similar, but would this be of any help?
I'd rather create sgi and bsd subdirectories...

(Comments welcome ;)

How about an ASSIGNED keyword indicating wether the tests are assigned,
should the need arise. And an AUTHOR comment?

IF we ever would distribute the benchmark suite (I don't yet see the need to
anyway), we will have to think about the home-grown licenses in the nongpl
dir.

      -----==-                                             |
      ----==-- _                                           |
      ---==---(_)__  __ ____  __       Marc Lehmann      +--
      --==---/ / _ \/ // /\ \/ /       pcg@goof.com      |e|
      -=====/_/_//_/\_,_/ /_/\_\       XX11-RIPE         --+
    The choice of a GNU generation                       |
                                                         |

  reply	other threads:[~1999-01-22 12:25 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
1999-01-31 23:58 Marc Lehmann
1999-01-20 18:54 ` Arvind Sankar
1999-01-20 19:12   ` Arvind Sankar
1999-01-31 23:58     ` Arvind Sankar
1999-01-31 23:58   ` Arvind Sankar
1999-01-28  5:53 ` egcs benchmark suite, nits Marc Espie
1999-01-31 23:58   ` Marc Espie
1999-01-31 23:58 ` announce: egcs benchmark suite, alpha release Dave Love
1999-01-31 23:58   ` Jeffrey A Law
1999-01-22 12:25     ` Marc Lehmann [this message]
1999-01-24  8:28       ` Dave Love
1999-01-24 14:52         ` Marc Lehmann
1999-01-31 23:58           ` Marc Lehmann
1999-01-31 23:58         ` Dave Love
1999-01-31 23:58       ` Marc Lehmann

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=19990122034201.B24106@cerebro.laendle \
    --to=pcg@goof.com \
    --cc=egcs@cygnus.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).