"Paul C. Leopardi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The preamble to g++ testing says:
>
> make[1]: [check-gcc] Error 1 (ignored)
> (rootme=`${PWDCMD-pwd}`; export rootme; \
> srcdir=`cd ../../gcc-4.0.1/gcc; ${PWDCMD-pwd}` ; export srcdir ; \
> cd testsuite; \
> EXPECT=expect ; export EXPECT ; \
> if [ -f ${rootme}/../expect/expect ] ; then \
> TCL_LIBRARY=`cd .. ; cd ../../gcc-4.0.1/gcc/../tcl/library ;
> ${PWDCMD-pwd}` ; \
> export TCL_LIBRARY ; fi ; \
> runtest --tool g++ )
> Test Run By leopardi on Sat Jul 23 00:05:15 2005
> Native configuration is x86_64-suse-linux-gnu
>
> Is the command "runtest --tool g++" correct? I noticed that proc g++_init
> contains the code:
> if ![info exists GXX_UNDER_TEST] then {
> if [info exists TOOL_EXECUTABLE] {
> set GXX_UNDER_TEST $TOOL_EXECUTABLE;
> Does "runtest --tool g++" set TOOL_EXECUTABLE to "g++" ?
No. (Although --tool_executable=g++ would.) But --tool g++ is
correct. GXX_UNDER_TEST is normally set by the clauses after the ones
you showed.
> Finally, in the output of "make -k check", g++ summary says:
>
> === g++ Summary ===
>
> # of expected passes 9113
> # of unexpected failures 2166
> # of unexpected successes 16
> # of expected failures 54
> # of unresolved testcases 61
> # of untested testcases 54
> # of unsupported tests 90
> /usr/bin/g++ version 3.3.4 (pre 3.3.5 20040809)
>
> I guess that the last line of g++ summary is printed by proc g++_version in
> g++.exp. Does this imply that proc g++_init has set the compiler via
> GXX_UNDER_TEST to either "/usr/bin/g++" or more likely, "g++" ?
GXX_UNDER_TEST has been set to /usr/bin/g++.
Ian
