https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89255
Iain Buclaw changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89255
--- Comment #17 from ibuclaw at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: ibuclaw
Date: Fri Apr 12 06:25:17 2019
New Revision: 270302
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=270302=gcc=rev
Log:
libphobos: Replace library check programs with dg-runtest
Fixes
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89255
--- Comment #16 from ibuclaw at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: ibuclaw
Date: Fri Apr 12 06:25:04 2019
New Revision: 270301
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=270301=gcc=rev
Log:
d: Add -fbuilding-libphobos-tests option
Currently, the druntime
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89255
Iain Buclaw changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #46060|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89255
--- Comment #14 from Iain Buclaw ---
Created attachment 46077
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=46077=edit
Add libphobos_test_name var
I'll just post this before I retired.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89255
--- Comment #13 from Iain Buclaw ---
(In reply to Iain Buclaw from comment #12)
>
> They differ by libphobos_run_args, not by compilation flags.
>
> Maybe I'm running these tests in a lazy way, but would appending the
> execution args to the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89255
--- Comment #12 from Iain Buclaw ---
(In reply to r...@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de from comment #9)
> > --- Comment #6 from Iain Buclaw ---
> > Created attachment 46069 [details]
> > --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=46069=edit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89255
--- Comment #11 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #10 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE Uni-Bielefeld.DE> ---
>> --- Comment #7 from Iain Buclaw ---
>> Ignoring the test results, multilib handling seems to be
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89255
--- Comment #10 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #7 from Iain Buclaw ---
> Ignoring the test results, multilib handling seems to be working well for you
> then?
It does indeed, thanks. Not having tested Solaris/SPARC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89255
--- Comment #9 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #6 from Iain Buclaw ---
> Created attachment 46069
> --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=46069=edit
> Use dg-runtest instead of dg-test
>
> (In reply to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89255
--- Comment #8 from Iain Buclaw ---
(In reply to r...@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de from comment #5)
> > --- Comment #4 from Iain Buclaw ---
> > (In reply to r...@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de from comment #3)
> >>
> >> FAIL: ../src/std/range/package.d
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89255
--- Comment #7 from Iain Buclaw ---
Ignoring the test results, multilib handling seems to be working well for you
then?
I can create individual PRs for each failure later.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89255
--- Comment #6 from Iain Buclaw ---
Created attachment 46069
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=46069=edit
Use dg-runtest instead of dg-test
(In reply to Iain Buclaw from comment #4)
> (In reply to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89255
--- Comment #5 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #4 from Iain Buclaw ---
> (In reply to r...@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de from comment #3)
>>
>> * On Linux/x86_64, I see a few failures on i686:
>> WARNING:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89255
--- Comment #4 from Iain Buclaw ---
(In reply to r...@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de from comment #3)
>
> * On Linux/x86_64, I see a few failures on i686:
>
> Running target unix/-m32
> FAIL: ../libdruntime/core/thread.d -fversion=Shared
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89255
--- Comment #3 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE ---
> --- Comment #2 from Iain Buclaw ---
[...]
> I posted this to gcc-patches in three parts, it would be good if you can test
> it on solaris before I commit.
Sure: I meant to do so once
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89255
--- Comment #2 from Iain Buclaw ---
Created attachment 46060
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=46060=edit
patch for pr89255
I posted this to gcc-patches in three parts, it would be good if you can test
it on solaris before I
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89255
--- Comment #1 from Iain Buclaw ---
I'll use this PR as a reference to adding a compiler switch for building
modules in a "unittest runner" mode. This to allow making it possible to build
all modules using dg-runtest without getting linker
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89255
Rainer Orth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |9.0
19 matches
Mail list logo
