On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 10:45:54AM +0400, Kostya Serebryany wrote: > Many thanks, Jakub. > > I don't want to appear in this situation again. > Would you suggest a place to create a wiki page which would list all > required steps to test libsanitizer? > > libsanitizer is (unfortunately) a very system-dependent beast and our > upstream commits will break other platforms regularly; > that's unavoidable unless each platform's community helps us test the > code upstream. (I.e. I encourage PowerPC folks to help us in the LLVM > land)
Maybe it should be removed completely then, if you are going to break things on a regular basis. Or at least made a configuration option that is OFF by default. Or kept in a branch. > For gcc merges, all we can promise to do is to run any amount of > testing (described on a to-be-created wiki) on an x86_64 linux > machine. > For other kinds of testing we'll rely on the platform owners. > If we break someone's platform, we expect the owners to send us > patches which we can commit upstream. That's what happened with x32 > last week. NO, NO, NO, NO. We have the GCC compile farm for a reason. Use it to test system dependent changes before committing them to the trunk. I have too much on my plate that I'm scrambling to get my changes done before stage1 closes. I don't have time or engery to fix code that other people broke. I'm sorry, but I'm really getting annoyed by the length of time it has taken to get this resolved. -- Michael Meissner, IBM IBM, M/S 2506R, 550 King Street, Littleton, MA 01460, USA email: meiss...@linux.vnet.ibm.com, phone: +1 (978) 899-4797
