> Dennis Clarke <dcla...@blastwave.org> writes: > >> Do you know if anyone has ever tested that on Solaris ? Lately Solaris >> is >> where open source goes to die ( blame Larry for that ) so I figure I may >> as well give it a shot, but before I do .. tell me know if this little >> trick works at all. > > Why shouldn't it?
No idea, and in the absence of data, I just am not sure yet. > I'm using it all the way from Solaris 8 to 11, with N > from 2 on a single-CPU HP Proliant DL-320 G2 via 96 on a 8-socket > NehalemEX Fujitsu RX900 S1 up to 128 on a SPARC Enterprise T5120. > awesome ... I am running it right now with N=2 and I have to assume that it will do the *exact* same results for my testsuite results. I already posted this : http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2011-03/msg02960.html So right now the very same machine, with no changes at all, is runnung with N=2. Thus far it looks to be quite busy : mpstat 5 says . . . CPU minf mjf xcal intr ithr csw icsw migr smtx srw syscl usr sys wt idl 0 4552 1 151 623 235 399 100 80 82 0 4185 50 46 4 0 1 4538 1 225 286 49 360 106 76 81 0 3200 59 38 2 1 CPU minf mjf xcal intr ithr csw icsw migr smtx srw syscl usr sys wt idl 0 3836 1 213 582 282 316 93 62 62 0 3375 62 34 3 0 1 4463 0 142 378 81 348 108 57 64 0 3655 62 36 2 1 CPU minf mjf xcal intr ithr csw icsw migr smtx srw syscl usr sys wt idl 0 3180 1 141 521 220 286 81 56 44 0 3363 65 32 2 1 1 2895 0 150 258 38 298 93 59 49 0 2791 67 30 2 0 . . . > The only caveat are strange errors with gmake: > > make[3]: write error > > See CR 6938116 GNU make highly unreliable: `write error' message. > > I've hacked around this by ignoring the error in misc.c (close_stdout) ;-) > It seems odd that gmake would pass every test in its own testsuite and then get an odd little message like that. Oh well, if you feel it can be ignored then I'm so very happy to see this. By the way, I just want to say thank you for posting results on Solaris because I review them and use them for comparison all the time. I am still fascinated that GCC can post different results on two servers running the same OS and probably with the same revs of tools avail. Consider this on Sol 8 i386 : === gcc Summary === # of expected passes 72652 # of unexpected failures 18 # of expected failures 212 # of unresolved testcases 1 # of unsupported tests 1874 /opt/bw/src/GCC/gcc-4.6.0_SunOS5.8_i386.001/gcc/xgcc version 4.6.0 (Blastwave.org Inc. Mon Mar 28 13:18:17 GMT 2011) This : http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2011-03/msg02832.html === gcc Summary === # of expected passes 74529 # of unexpected failures 1 # of expected failures 212 # of unresolved testcases 1 # of unsupported tests 1031 /var/gcc/gcc-4.6.0/8-gcc-gas/gcc/xgcc version 4.6.0 (GCC) I decided to toss caution to the wind and run my build with as and ld in /usr/ccs/bin and I was happy to see a decent result set. I often wonder if we *need* GNU as or just *want* GNU as in an older Solaris release like 8. -- Dennis Clarke dcla...@opensolaris.ca <- Email related to the open source Solaris dcla...@blastwave.org <- Email related to open source for Solaris
