> From: Mike Stump <mikest...@comcast.net> > Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2011 17:53:05 +0100
> On Nov 4, 2011, at 6:47 AM, Hans-Peter Nilsson <hans-peter.nils...@axis.com> > wrote: > > Ping again, CC:ing testsuite maintainers. > > With the number of qualified individuals commenting in the > thread, I was going to stay out of it. If all the breakages > and review point others had are resolved, Ok. I know people responded to my patch message when reporting problems after Honza's LTO_TORTURE_OPTIONS change but as I mentioned, those breakages were unrelated to my patch, and AFAICT mostly for load_lib ordering problems and for not setting GCC_UNDER_TEST properly in Honza's original change for use in other testsuites. I should have guessed and I'll remember to scream loudly next time I'm implicated that way. :) I looked and it seemed that Richi's problems was unresolved, running make check-gfortran RUNTESTFLAGS="dg.exp=logical_dot_product.f90" supposedly in the obj/gcc subdir - use check-fortran from the obj/ toplevel. But I can't repeat it neither with nor without my patch. Richi? > I kinda don't > like the brittle upvars. That's just the way it has to be done to inspect the necessary dejagnu state and how other lib/*.exp infrastructure parts are doing it, some for exactly the same "upvar" (lto and scanasm). If this use breaks, they break too. I thought about it, but found no other way. Maybe as a future dejagnu improvements introducing stable hooks in dejagnu would be one way to do it. (For dejagnu folks convenience, thread at <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-10/msg01917.html>) > If someone has a substantially less > brittle method that does not use upvar and is reasonably > concise and readable... I'll wait a few days. brgds, H-P _______________________________________________ DejaGnu mailing list DejaGnu@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/dejagnu
