From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 21721 invoked by alias); 17 May 2005 21:56:36 -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 21635 invoked from network); 17 May 2005 21:56:29 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO tsop.dmu.ac.uk) (146.227.1.5) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 17 May 2005 21:56:29 -0000 Received: from europa.cse.dmu.ac.uk (root@europa.cse.dmu.ac.uk [146.227.57.47]) by tsop.dmu.ac.uk (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id j4HLuFT9031813; Tue, 17 May 2005 22:56:15 +0100 Received: from brains (brains.eng.cse.dmu.ac.uk [146.227.22.1]) by europa.cse.dmu.ac.uk (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id j4HLuFnJ019700; Tue, 17 May 2005 22:56:15 +0100 (BST) Received: from brains.eng.cse.dmu.ac.uk ([146.227.22.1] helo=brains) by brains with esmtp (Exim 4.44) id 1DYA2x-0001bK-Ho; Tue, 17 May 2005 22:56:15 +0100 Date: Tue, 17 May 2005 22:20:00 -0000 From: Hugh Sasse X-X-Sender: hgs@brains.eng.cse.dmu.ac.uk To: "Joseph S. Myers" cc: "Joel Sherrill " , Joe Buck , Ralf Corsepius , Steven Bosscher , GCC List Subject: Re: GCC 4.1: Buildable on GHz machines only? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: <17009.2368.986169.753001@cuddles.cambridge.redhat.com> <200505170311.03979.stevenb@suse.de> <20050517011655.GA25562@synopsys.com> <200505170331.25016.stevenb@suse.de> <1116321262.8237.837.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <20050517164335.GA12338@synopsys.com> <428A25BA.6050308@OARcorp.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-DMU-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-DMU-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-MailScanner-From: hgs@dmu.ac.uk X-SW-Source: 2005-05/txt/msg00939.txt.bz2 On Tue, 17 May 2005, Joseph S. Myers wrote: [...] > shortly. All those posted (at least this month) seem to get posted with > subject lines which do not match the normal form produced by test_summary > and so don't get so readily found by my script which counts how many test > results postings there are for different versions and targets. For > example, [Example *very* trimmed -- hgs@dmu.ac.uk] > comparison to 4.1.0 20050416 (experimental)". Ensuring your test results > use the standard Subject header format makes it more likely they can > handled properly by sites processing the gcc-testresults postings into Is this standard documented (where?), please? I ask because the script that generates these has few comments, so it's a little difficult to know what will break when 'meddling' :-) with it. I know that could sound aggressive/negative, but I don't intend that tone. Sometimes the most useful thing I can do is post test results, so I'd at least like to do that right. [...] Aside to those finding the criticisms hard to take: For my part, GCC has given years of good service, but to raise a problem efficiently means leaving out the appropriate proportion of praise. Thank you Hugh