From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-return-71133-listarch-gcc=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 11291 invoked by alias); 28 Mar 2003 13:59:09 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/>
Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 11282 invoked from network); 28 Mar 2003 13:59:09 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO nile.gnat.com) (205.232.38.5)
  by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 28 Mar 2003 13:59:09 -0000
Received: by nile.gnat.com (Postfix, from userid 338)
	id 68BA7F2DFB; Fri, 28 Mar 2003 08:59:09 -0500 (EST)
To: bosch@gnat.com, guerby@acm.org
Subject: Re: ACATS & GCC testsuite
Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org
Message-Id: <20030328135909.68BA7F2DFB@nile.gnat.com>
Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2003 15:00:00 -0000
From: dewar@gnat.com (Robert Dewar)
X-SW-Source: 2003-03/txt/msg01716.txt.bz2

> > but if any new failures occur they represent real regressions.
> 
> Agreed. That will be very nice to start with zero regression
> on the Ada side. 

Just so nothing gets missed here, Geert's point, which I am not sure was clear
was that it is valuable to have ACATS regression testing installed right now,
since any *new* regressions are always problems, regardless of what versions of
sources are involved.