On 08/22/2014 12:18 AM, Mike Stump wrote:
> On Aug 18, 2014, at 3:06 AM, Chen Gang <gang.chen.5...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> - one for original latest gcc source code (master for 20140816).
>>
>> - one for my modification based on the original latest gcc source code.
>>
>> - they passed building, but for make check, they reported same issues:
>
> So, I see no evidence that you ran contrib/compare_tests yet. Did you? If
> so, what was the output?
>
>> For only sending my patch, may I bypass them,
>
> So, the output of the make check is uninteresting, only the regressions
> identified by compare_tests are interesting. If none, then you’re set wrt
> the current patch.
>
OK, thanks. At present, under Fedora 20 x86_64, it passed normal
testsuite:
- "../gcc/configure && make && make check" succeed (echo $? == 0).
- "contrib/compare_test dir_orig dir_new" succeed (echo $? == 0).
- The related output of "contrib/compare_test" are:
# Comparing directories
## Dir1=/upstream/build-gcc: 11 sum files
## Dir2=/upstream/build-gcc-new: 11 sum files
# Comparing 11 common sum files
## /bin/sh ./compare_tests /tmp/gxx-sum1.7678 /tmp/gxx-sum2.7678
# No differences found in 11 common sum files
>> and then I shall try to analyze them one by one in another time, next?
>
> You can, if you want. For example, there is a PR on the darwin issue that
> has state in it. Roughly binds local is slightly wrong and need fixing.
>
OK, thank. I shall still try the Darwin, next, in another time, although
it is not related with my new patches for sending.
At last: Thank all of you very much for your much help, and I shall send
related patch next.
Thanks.
--
Chen Gang
Open share and attitude like air water and life which God blessed
