public inbox for gcc@gcc.gnu.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jason Thorpe <thorpej@wasabisystems.com>
To: Marc Espie <espie@quatramaran.ens.fr>
Cc: zack@codesourcery.com, gcc@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: PROPOSAL: Policy for obsoleting targets
Date: Wed, 21 May 2003 17:12:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <26C8D0BC-8BAD-11D7-A33E-000A957650EC@wasabisystems.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200305181417.h4IEHbp21625@quatramaran.ens.fr>

[ I apologize .. I'm finally catching up on GCC mail, having not had 
the time to read
   it for a about a month .. ]

On Sunday, May 18, 2003, at 07:17  AM, Marc Espie wrote:

> I'm completely against this.

I'll agree with Marc, here.

NetBSD is in a situation where we were at 2.95 for quite a long time 
for various stupid reasons (mainly "no one willing to get 
NetBSD-specific fixes into GCC mainline" for a long time ... until I 
stepped up to the task, for better or worse :-)

GCC 3.3 is the first GCC release in a VERY long time which supports the 
majority of NetBSD's supported platforms out-of-box, so you're 
certainly not going to see 3.x test results before 3.3 that cover a 
wide range of NetBSD targets.

There are other issues with testing, as well... NetBSD runs on quite a 
number of platforms, many of which are hard to find, are extremely 
slow, or consume way too much power for anyone to want to power it up 
for any length of time.  Considering how piggish GCC has become in 
terms of compile speed, it takes a REALLY long time to bootstrap on my 
HP 9000/380, only to find out at the end of a couple of days that 
libstdc++ failed to compile due to an assembler bug.

Here are what I see as some gaps in GCC testing support:

	1. There does not appear to be a pre-packaged "automated regression 
testing kit"
	   in the source tree.  For people with a limited amount of time, 
setting one up
	   can be an obstacle.  If there were a nice set of scripts and 
concise instructions
	   on how to set them up and use them, this would be a big help.

	2. It does not appear as if the testsuite is run in rsh mode very 
often.  Because
	   I have a number of slow targets to support, I really like to run 
the testsuite on
	   a host, and use the rsh method to run execute tests on the target.  
However, I
	   have run into problems with some of the tests in this type of 
configuration, and
	   I have little time to actually track them down at the moment.

	   Obviously, if the scripts mentioned in (1) supported a 
host-rsh-target setup,
	   that'd be extra cool :-)

	3. GCC's compile-time performance is so bad that it causes testsuite 
failures on
	   some platforms simply because dejagnu gives up waiting for the 
compiler to
	   finish.  I have not been able to run the testsuite on an SS20 for 
quite a long
	   time.  There's really no excuse for that.

Anyway, these three things would certainly help me provide more regular 
NetBSD test results, and would make it *possible* for me to report on 
more platforms than x86, alpha, and mipseb.

         -- Jason R. Thorpe <thorpej@wasabisystems.com>

  parent reply	other threads:[~2003-05-21 16:56 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 39+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2003-05-16 16:08 Zack Weinberg
2003-05-16 16:31 ` Peter Barada
2003-05-16 17:42   ` Joel Sherrill
2003-05-16 18:30     ` DJ Delorie
2003-05-16 19:19     ` E. Weddington
2003-05-16 22:09       ` Joel Sherrill
2003-05-16 20:16     ` Janis Johnson
2003-05-16 22:10       ` Joel Sherrill
2003-05-16 22:51         ` Janis Johnson
2003-05-16 22:25       ` Paul Koning
2003-05-16 22:34         ` Joel Sherrill
2003-05-16 22:56           ` Alexandre Oliva
2003-05-17  0:02             ` Joe Buck
2003-05-18  6:16               ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2003-05-21 16:46                 ` Jason Thorpe
2003-05-19 22:51               ` Michael S. Zick
2003-05-19 23:46                 ` Dan Kegel
2003-05-20  0:08                   ` Joe Buck
2003-05-22  2:31               ` Ben Elliston
2003-05-22  5:42                 ` Dan Kegel
2003-05-22 12:22                   ` Michael S. Zick
2003-05-19  2:28         ` Peter Barada
2003-05-19 13:20           ` Paul Koning
2003-05-16 16:34 ` Joe Buck
2003-05-16 17:04   ` Joseph S. Myers
2003-05-16 21:12     ` Joe Buck
2003-05-16 21:21       ` Joseph S. Myers
2003-05-21 16:35       ` Jason Thorpe
2003-05-21 22:02         ` Michael S. Zick
2003-05-16 19:29   ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2003-05-16 16:59 ` Jan Vroonhof
2003-05-18 14:22 ` Marc Espie
2003-05-19 18:28   ` Joe Buck
2003-05-21 17:12   ` Jason Thorpe [this message]
2003-05-21 17:49     ` Dan Kegel
2003-05-21  5:25 ` Zack Weinberg
2003-05-21 14:01   ` Michael S. Zick
2003-05-21 16:56   ` Dan Kegel
2003-05-19 18:49 Karim Yaghmour

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=26C8D0BC-8BAD-11D7-A33E-000A957650EC@wasabisystems.com \
    --to=thorpej@wasabisystems.com \
    --cc=espie@quatramaran.ens.fr \
    --cc=gcc@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=zack@codesourcery.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).