From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-return-49917-listarch-gcc=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 10130 invoked by alias); 14 Apr 2002 14:18:07 -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 10123 invoked from network); 14 Apr 2002 14:18:05 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO Cantor.suse.de) (213.95.15.193)
  by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 14 Apr 2002 14:18:05 -0000
Received: from Hermes.suse.de (Charybdis.suse.de [213.95.15.201])
	by Cantor.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 69EF21E775; Sun, 14 Apr 2002 16:18:05 +0200 (MEST)
Received: from aj by arthur.inka.de with local (Exim 3.34 #1)
	id 16wkpP-0004Ui-00; Sun, 14 Apr 2002 16:18:03 +0200
Mail-Copies-To: never
To: Jason Merrill <jason@redhat.com>
Cc: Geoffrey Keating <geoffk@redhat.com>,
	Mark Mitchell <mark@codesourcery.com>, gcc@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: GCC 3.1 Release
References: <46690000.1018660657@gandalf.codesourcery.com>
	<87662vicoi.fsf@creche.redhat.com>
	<wvlit6u4eh8.fsf@prospero.cambridge.redhat.com>
From: Andreas Jaeger <aj@suse.de>
Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2002 07:25:00 -0000
In-Reply-To: <wvlit6u4eh8.fsf@prospero.cambridge.redhat.com> (Jason
 Merrill's message of "Sun, 14 Apr 2002 14:05:55 +0100")
Message-ID: <u8lmbqs6sk.fsf@gromit.moeb>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.090006 (Oort Gnus v0.06) XEmacs/21.4 (Artificial
 Intelligence, i386-suse-linux)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-SW-Source: 2002-04/txt/msg00569.txt.bz2

Jason Merrill <jason@redhat.com> writes:

>>>>>> "Tom" == Tom Tromey <tromey@redhat.com> writes:
>
>> What I'd like to see in the future is for people to set up automated
>> regression testers, say like Geoff's, that test these platforms.  Then
>> we simply won't introduce problems in the first place.
>
>> In fact what I'd really like to see is a requirement for such a
>> regression tester for every platform that is considered release
>> critical.  (I'm sure the logistics of this are difficult.)
>
> Absolutely.  Geoff, how hard would it be for someone on the net to set up a
> slave tester to improve coverage?  I'd like to keep the bookkeeping
> centralized, but the actual testing work can and should be distributed.

What do you mean with slave tester?

Andreas
-- 
 Andreas Jaeger
  SuSE Labs aj@suse.de
   private aj@arthur.inka.de
    http://www.suse.de/~aj