Hi Alexandre,
> On Jul 1, 2026, Rainer Orth <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> gcc/libgcc.a will not be found and finding et-static.exp will
>> fail.
>
> I think my -print-file-name suggestion would help with that, and also
> with installed testing.
indeed: if I install et-static.exp into $libsubdir/testsuite/et-static.exp,
gcc -print-file-name=testsuite/et-static.exp works fine so far, even in
various places inside the build tree. I'll give that a whirl.
> To be clear, I'm not so concerned about using some random source tree to
> test a very old installed compiler. I don't think that's a scenario
> worth worrying about.
Good, that certainly simplifies things.
> What I expect to be far more common (though not anywhere as common as
> build-tree testing, sadly) is for someone to build, install, (package?),
> deploy, and then test the toolchain as a user would, using the
> corresponding testsuite because that's what that compiler version is
> supposed to be compatible with. So if that testsuite expects there to
> be a et-static.exp or whatever, it shall find it, instead of requiring
> additional steps for it to be there.
Nice idea, and completely transparent to the user.
Thanks for the suggestion.
Rainer
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rainer Orth, Center for Biotechnology, Bielefeld University
