Hi all,
I'm wondering if there is any guidance regarding the list of dependencies to
include for object files. For example, I see this list of dependencies for
aarch64-builtins.o in aarch64/t-aarch64:
$(srcdir)/config/aarch64/aarch64-builtins.c $(CONFIG_H) \
$(SYSTEM_H) coretypes.h $(TM_H) \
Thanks, Joseph. This is exactly what I was looking for.
-Andrew
-Original Message-
From: gcc-ow...@gcc.gnu.org On Behalf Of Joseph Myers
Sent: Tuesday, October 8, 2019 3:57 PM
To: Andrew Dean
Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: makefile dependencies
On Tue, 8 Oct 2019, Andrew Dean via gcc
TLDR: I'd like to propose adding a dependency on a modern unit testing
framework to make it easier to write unit tests within GCC. Before I spend much
more time on it, what sort of buy-in should I get? Are there any people in
particular I should work more closely with as I make this change?
Te
> From: David Malcolm
> Sent: Thursday, October 24, 2019 11:18 PM
> On Thu, 2019-10-24 at 20:50 +0000, Andrew Dean via gcc wrote:
> Thanks for your email, it looks interesting. Is your code somewhere we can
> see
> it?
It can be -- what is the preferred way to share the
I'm curious what other people are doing, because I'm never able to match the
results that get reported to the test-results list. I created a brand new
virtual machine running Ubuntu 18.04 (x86_64), installed the prereqs as listed
here: https://gcc.gnu.org/install/prerequisites.html, created the
> > Whereas the most recent reported results (10.0.0 20191118) show only 2
> unexpected failures and no unexpected successes in the gcc summary.
>
> Which results are you looking at?
> Two failures sounds very low, it's probably not running the guality tests
> which
> usually fail.
>
I searched
> > > > Whereas the most recent reported results (10.0.0 20191118) show
> > > > only 2
> > > unexpected failures and no unexpected successes in the gcc summary.
> > >
> > > Which results are you looking at?
> > > Two failures sounds very low, it's probably not running the guality
> > > tests which
> > Many systems do not have a system compiler newer than this *four years
> > old* one. GCC 4.8 is the first GCC version that supports all of
> > C++11, which is the only reason it would be even near acceptable to
> > require something this *new*.
>
> Agreed. Note we're even shipping new servic
Based on https://www.gnu.org/software/hurd/hurd/glibc.html, I'm using
glibc/scripts/build-many-glibcs.py targeting aarch64-linux-gnu as so:
build-many-glibcs.py build_dir checkout --keep all
build-many-glibcs.py build_dir host-libraries --keep all -j 12
build-many-glibcs.py build_dir compilers
> > This completes successfully. However, when I then try to run the gcc tests
> > like
> so:
> > runtest --outdir . --tool gcc --srcdir /path/to/gcc/gcc/testsuite
> > aarch64.exp --target aarch64-linux-gnu --target_board aarch64-sim
> > --tool_exec
> > /path_to/build_dir/install/compilers/aarch64
> > >>> I get errors like this:
> > >>>
> > >>> aarch64-glibc-linux-gnu-gcc: fatal error: cannot read spec file
> > >>> 'rdimon.specs': No such file or directory
> > >>>
> > >>> I can see that the rdimon.specs flag is added based on this line
> > >>> in aarch64-
> > >> sim.exp:
> > >>
> > >> Where
> On 11/25/19 2:43 PM, Andrew Dean via gcc wrote:
> >>>>>> I get errors like this:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> aarch64-glibc-linux-gnu-gcc: fatal error: cannot read spec file
> >>>>>> 'rdimon.specs': No suc
12 matches
Mail list logo
