On 4/3/20 7:57 PM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On Fri, 3 Apr 2020 at 18:54, Bernd Edlinger <bernd.edlin...@hotmail.de> wrote:
>>
>> On 4/3/20 7:50 PM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>>> On Fri, 3 Apr 2020 at 18:45, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> I have a question about the gcc-testresults mailing list,
>>>> that is I see everyone using:
>>>>
>>>> [releases/gcc-9 revision
>>>> 02a201f71:0f58d3b54:0e66150084aa217811a5c45fb15e98d7ed3e8839]
>>>>
>>>> or
>>>>
>>>> [master revision
>>>> 63b2923dc6f:0c89e976db9:1c16f7fc903c1c1c912faf7889b69d83429b7b2e
>>>>
>>>> what is the first 2 hashes, I cant make sens out of it?
>>>
>>> See contrib/gcc_update, which sets that string:
>>>
>>> revision=`$GCC_GIT log -n1 --pretty=tformat:%p:%t:%H`
>>>
>>
>> ah, you mean my workflow was wrong,
>> git pull
>> configure
>> make
>> test
>> gcc_testresults?
>>
>> what is your workflow?
>
> Using contrib/gcc_update isn't required.
>
I wonder if I should return to using the snapshot files.
I am currently the only one testing armv7-gnueabihf modulo I'm using cortex-a9
I use a very slow custom device, it uses 5 days for bootstrap®testing.
But it works, and it is stress-testing the linux as well as producing
test results.
So in order to make the test results comparable I publish with
others, would it be good have different archs use the same revision,
by default, which would be the one picked once a week for the snapshots?
or does anyone test the snapshots and publish the results for differnt archs
using the snapshot instead of arbitrary versions ?
Of course using git it is rather simple to update to any version.
What do you think?
Bernd.
