On 22 Mar 2018, at 17:50, David Chisnall <gnus...@theravensnest.org> wrote: > > On 22 Mar 2018, at 17:29, Richard Frith-Macdonald > <richard.frith-macdon...@theengagehub.com> wrote: >> >> >> >>> On 22 Mar 2018, at 17:00, Richard Frith-Macdonald >>> <richard.frith-macdon...@theengagehub.com> wrote: >>> >>> >>> In any case, gnustep-tests is a fairly small shell script ... if really >>> stuck you could just hack a copy of it to add the 'messages=yes' >> >> I looked, and it turned out to be a tiny alteration to run make with >> 'messages=yes' when gnustep-tests is invoked with the --verbose option, so I >> did that; it seems to me the correct behavior for verbose mode. > > Thanks, I’m debugging the new ABI and so I need to see the exact compiler > invocation to fix compiler bugs. I am now in a state where I have as many > -base tests passing with the new ABI as with the old (just in time to head > out to a wine tasting in college!), up from about 2,000 more failures this > morning. I have only one big change and a few small ones as old ones left to > do, and then a lot of code cleanup and finish documenting the ABI. > > -base is broken in all sorts of exciting ways if extended type encodings leak > into places that expect traditional ones (I have fixes for most of them, but > fixing the runtime to not leak them is probably better!).
P.S. It would still be *very* useful to be able to properly run the tests in parallel. I am developing on a 32-core machine and running the GNUstep tests takes several minutes with most of the cores idle during that time. David _______________________________________________ Gnustep-dev mailing list Gnustep-dev@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnustep-dev
