Hi, Am 29. Oktober 2019 15:09:50 MEZ schrieb Vincent Lefevre <vinc...@vinc17.net>: >On 2019-10-29 13:09:46 +0100, rene.engelh...@mailbox.org wrote: >> Am 29. Oktober 2019 12:49:44 MEZ schrieb Vincent Lefevre ><vinc...@vinc17.net>: >> >In case makefile magic triggers some rebuild, you can also run the >> >generated executable directly (with the right environment variables, >> >in case this matters). If the programs honors the system ABI, this >> >is allowed, and you'll effectively test the new libstdc++6. >> >> No, if the rebuild rebuilds cppunittester or one of the >> exceptionprotectors or the smoketest so or similar we are at the >> same situation as with the autopkgtest (that's what it builds) and >> are not sure whether it's g++-9 or libstdc++6. Neither LO nor the >> test are an executable it's a executable with gazillions of .sos. > >I meant running the generated program (smoketest) without rebuilding >it:
Smoketest is not a program but also a libsmoketest.so "ran" by cppunittester. >1. Build smoketest with the old g++-9 / libstdc++6. >2. Upgrade g++-9 / libstdc++6. >3. Run smoketest directly. That would need to copy the longish command from the old log, but yeah. >(I assume that the smoketest executable does not invoke g++-9 to >rebuild things on the fly.) No, but make check in smokest might rebuild stuff. That was what I was aiming at. This already happens in "normal" builds. Regards Rene -- Diese Nachricht wurde von meinem Android-Gerät mit K-9 Mail gesendet.
