From: Janis Johnson <janis187@us.ibm.com>
To: David Edelsohn <dje@watson.ibm.com>
Cc: Janis Johnson <janis187@us.ibm.com>,
Joe Buck <jbuck@synopsys.com>,
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: build status page problem
Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 10:52:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20011205105507.A15791@us.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200112051821.NAA26124@makai.watson.ibm.com>; from dje@watson.ibm.com on Wed, Dec 05, 2001 at 01:21:45PM -0500
On Wed, Dec 05, 2001 at 01:21:45PM -0500, David Edelsohn wrote:
> >>>>> Janis Johnson writes:
>
> Janis> The assumption is that everything on the GCC 3.0 build status page
> Janis> builds with all releases of 3.0.x unless it says otherwise. So far
> Janis> there's only one note otherwise, for s390-linux-gnu which is supported
> Janis> beginning with 3.0.1.
>
> Janis> I'd prefer to keep that assumption. If there's a regression that
> Janis> prevents a target from building with a particular release we can add a
> Janis> note to that effect for that target.
>
> The problem is that we cannot tell from the page what reports we
> actually have received. If we have a report that some target worked with
> 3.0.1 but no report for 3.0.2, we cannot tell if it works and it may
> discourage someone from testing that new release and reporting the result.
>
> David
We don't get a flood of new reports for existing entries when a new
version of GCC is released, and I don't think that such reports would be
particularly useful. If there is an entry for a target and someone has
problems building it on some version of 3.0.x, then they should report
the problem, along with the fact that a successful build has been
reported.
Ideally, when a new release comes out people will build it and send in
their test results, which is more useful information than the build
status list. I see the build status list as initial information about
whether GCC 3.0.x is known to work on a particular target. There are
still a lot of variables that could prevent even the same version that
was reported from building on the same target with a slightly different
environment, so I hope that the existence of a target on the list
doesn't prevent new testing of it for new releases.
It would be useful to have a script similar to contrib/test_summary to
generate a message for reporting a successful build. Use of that script
would ensure that we get all of the relevant information in a report of
a successful build, including the configure flags to know whether all
languages were built, and versions of other relevant software on a
GNU/Linux system.
Janis
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2001-12-05 18:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2001-12-05 10:01 Joe Buck
2001-12-05 10:17 ` Janis Johnson
2001-12-05 10:22 ` Joe Buck
2001-12-05 10:22 ` David Edelsohn
2001-12-05 10:52 ` Janis Johnson [this message]
2001-12-09 12:52 ` Janis Johnson
2001-12-10 3:56 ` Gerald Pfeifer
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=20011205105507.A15791@us.ibm.com \
--to=janis187@us.ibm.com \
--cc=dje@watson.ibm.com \
--cc=gcc@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=jbuck@synopsys.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).