On Mon, Jul 29, 2019 at 4:03 PM Chris Johns <chr...@rtems.org> wrote: > > On 30/7/19 7:43 am, Gedare Bloom wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 25, 2019 at 6:34 AM Joel Sherrill <j...@rtems.org> wrote: > >> > >> Hi > >> > >> I am in the middle of building tools with a newlib bump to include the > >> ndbm addition. When I commit the patch which adds a test, builds with > >> older toolsets will break. > >> > >> I think I should conditionalize the test on the presence of one of the new > >> methods. > >> > >> Thoughts? > >> > > How long do you leave the condition in? > > Good question and I do not have an answer. > > > at first I thought this is OK, > > but generally we accept that a patch on master can cause a need to > > update toolchain. As long as the toolchain patch is upstreamed or > > available via RSB git-pull, I think it is fine to let older toolsets > > break. One should generally expect to rebuild their toolchain after > > git-pull of master anyway. > > It was very handy I did not need to build matching tools to bisect rtems.git > to > find the commit that broken the RPi. I was lucky in this case as I did not > need > to change tools. If I had to manually build the tools to match each rtems.git > commit being tested the task that took about an hour overall would have > extended > out to days. Automation of a bisect would help. > This is a good point. Maybe we can somehow buffer the need for toolchain updates (using conditionals) to some frequency (monthly/quarterly).
Gedare _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@rtems.org http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
