From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 32586 invoked by alias); 28 Mar 2003 00:03:20 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 32573 invoked from network); 28 Mar 2003 00:03:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO nile.gnat.com) (205.232.38.5) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 28 Mar 2003 00:03:19 -0000 Received: from gnat.com (darwin.gnat.com [205.232.38.44]) by nile.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 28D52F2D47; Thu, 27 Mar 2003 19:03:19 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2003 04:07:00 -0000 Subject: Re: ACATS & GCC testsuite Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v551) Cc: "gcc@gcc.gnu.org" To: Laurent Guerby From: Geert Bosch In-Reply-To: <1048804472.10770.42.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-Id: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2003-03/txt/msg01692.txt.bz2 On Thursday, Mar 27, 2003, at 17:34 America/New_York, Laurent Guerby wrote: > I know that the version of GNAT based on 3.2 delivered to customers > fixes the 40 or so ACATS tests failing in the current > public CVS (since I'm an ACT customer, but I also > know it has other problems :). In the last few weeks (since the beta-release you speak about), we have taken the following steps to contributing our GNAT changes to the FSF GCC tree, and be able to do this on a more regular basis in the future: - Put into place infrastructure that allows us to develop GNAT on the GCC HEAD branch in parallel with the last stable release version - Updated front end / back end interface as required for the extensive changes made in this area since GCC 3.2 - Merged in changes made to FSF tree with ACT changes, and adapted our procedures to match those used by rest of GCC project (no $Revision lines in headers, for example) - Checked in two bug fixes for the back end, which are required by the Ada sources we are contributing We are now at the stage that we can successfully bootstrap the latest GCC with the latest GNAT sources. The tasks to be completed in the coming weeks are the following: - Porting remaining back end patches against GCC 3.2.2 that could not go into that release to current GCC - Merging in our changes of GNAT back into the FSF repository These last two action items will be done in parallel and first Ada patches will go in this week. The makefiles are the biggest challenge for this last item. Problems with setting up the GCC test suite (see my message in http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2003-03/msg01134.html) are holding up integrating the back end patches. > Integrated ACATS testing has zero interest > until there are effective interactions between the ACT tree > and the public tree, see Richard Kenner's response > to my request on wether ACT outsiders could help > chasing Ada regressions (answer: no, total waste > of volunteer time). I'm not sure which message you're paraphrasing here, but I'm sure there must be a miscommunication here. It is of course extremely valuable if any regressions are caught when they occur! > I'm currently spending my limited free time on other projects > but will be happy to resume my efforts when it's useful. I think it would be very useful to have ACATS testing capability for GCC at any time. If you prefer to wait until after sources have been merged, so we'll start out with few or no failures, that is fine. However, having regression tests is useful at any point. If we have 40 failures now, it may indeed not make sense for volunteers to go hunt at them at this point while ACT is working on integrating the fixes, but if any new failures occur they represent real regressions. > The current ACATS setup has been used by some people > to check various ports (some of them not supported > by ACT), I update it when new ACATS releases are made (a few weeks ago > BTW) and I run it regularly on my home machine. That's good to know, thanks for your work here. > My last email to Geert and Robert on the topic (ada/5909) was > sent one month ago, without reply unless I missed it. While I try to keep up with all GCC mail, I think I must have missed your message. I just checked ada/5909 and don't see your message there either, so could you resend it? If you don't receive a reply on a message within a week or so, please ping me again. -Geert