On Mon, 2009-02-16 at 10:09 -0800, Janis Johnson wrote: > On Fri, 2009-02-13 at 12:28 -0800, Joe Buck wrote: > > On Fri, Feb 13, 2009 at 11:03:51AM -0800, Anthony Newnam wrote: > > > Thanks Joe. > > > > > > As far as I know the problem I'm seeing isn't a regression but perhaps > > > this script could still be useful. I don't really understand how it is > > > supposed to work, since it doesn't appear be working off svn updates. > > > > I haven't looked at it in years, so I can't help you there. When Janis > > first wrote the script gcc was still using CVS. But it should be useful > > as a starting point. > > I've been using a different version since we moved to Subversion, and > have intended to add it to contrib/. Maybe I'll do that now! > > > > Should I do something like a binary svn search between revisions > > > 124707 and 132947? It takes such a long amount of time to compile g++, > > > almost a half an hour with my quad core, that it didn't seem practical > > > try to do build so many times. I guess there is probably a way to > > > build g++ without the rest of gcc, but I haven't seen an option for > > > it. > > > > Yes. It would suffice to only build phase 1 of g++, without any libraries, > > to do what you want, so that should be faster. You don't need a full > > bootstrap. If the endpoints you list are correct, that's 8240 revisions > > to search, but a binary search only needs to try ceil(log2(8240)) > > revisions, or 14. So if each build and test takes 30 minutes, you'll > > have your answer in seven hours. > > I'll include my build script for the compiler only, which works back to > early 2003. > > Please ping me daily until I do this!
I've checked in the newer regression hunt scripts, details in gcc-patches. Janis
