Re: [buildrobot] microblaze-elf / microblaze-linux

[Jan-Benedict Glaw <jbglaw@lug-owl.de>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1558 bytes --]

On Tue, 2013-11-26 15:21:12 +0000, Joern Rennecke <joern.rennecke@embecosm.com> wrote:
> On 26 November 2013 14:51, Jan-Benedict Glaw <jbglaw@lug-owl.de> wrote:
> > On Tue, 2013-11-26 06:33:39 -0600, Joel Sherrill <Joel.Sherrill@OARcorp.com> wrote:
> > > Was microblaze-rtems attempted? I would have expected a failure
> > > like these if so.
> >
> > No, it wasn't.  It's not on the list of targets in
> > .../gcc/contrib/config-list.mk .  So we'd probably add that to the
> > target list I guess?  I'll propose a patch later tonight (adding
> > to another pending patch to config-list.mk)
> 
> The idea if config-list.mk is not to build every conceivable target
> configuration, but to give a reasonable converage of the different
> target architectures and OS/library configurations so that you can
> effectively  test a patch with unknown target-specific impact.

Is it like that?  My impression is/was that people collected a list of
targets they somewhat care for. With around 200 configurations, among
them some that are quite similar, adding another just adds 1/2%, which
I'd call neglectible.

> Is there something that microblaze-rtems exposes that is not already
> covered by other microblaze or rtems targets that are already included?

Probably not (without having looked at what that configuration would
actually pull in.)

MfG, JBG

-- 
      Jan-Benedict Glaw      jbglaw@lug-owl.de              +49-172-7608481
Signature of:         Alles wird gut! ...und heute wirds schon ein bißchen besser.
the second  :

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]