Re: [buildrobot] First results of running contrib/config-list.mk

2013-12-02 Thread Joseph S. Myers
On Mon, 2 Dec 2013, Jan-Benedict Glaw wrote: > On Mon, 2013-12-02 12:08:25 +0100, Gerald Pfeifer wrote: > > On Tue, 26 Nov 2013, Joseph S. Myers wrote: > > > I think it's time to remove targets that have been under > > > --enable-obsolete > > > for a while - and to obsolete, for possible future

Re: [buildrobot] First results of running contrib/config-list.mk

2013-12-02 Thread Jan-Benedict Glaw
On Mon, 2013-12-02 12:08:25 +0100, Gerald Pfeifer wrote: > On Tue, 26 Nov 2013, Joseph S. Myers wrote: > > I think it's time to remove targets that have been under --enable-obsolete > > for a while - and to obsolete, for possible future removal, targets > > without stdint.h type information conf

Re: [buildrobot] First results of running contrib/config-list.mk

2013-12-02 Thread Gerald Pfeifer
On Tue, 26 Nov 2013, Joseph S. Myers wrote: > I think it's time to remove targets that have been under --enable-obsolete > for a while - and to obsolete, for possible future removal, targets > without stdint.h type information configured in GCC (see list in >

Re: [buildrobot] First results of running contrib/config-list.mk

2013-11-26 Thread Joseph S. Myers
Many such failures may already have bugs in Bugzilla (generally filed by Joern). I think it's time to remove targets that have been under --enable-obsolete for a while - and to obsolete, for possible future removal, targets without stdint.h type information configured in GCC (see list in

Re: [buildrobot] First results of running contrib/config-list.mk

2013-11-26 Thread Ian Lance Taylor
On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 7:20 PM, Jan-Benedict Glaw wrote: > > The two build robot instances that schedule jobs using > contrib/config-list.mk are done with two rounds. I haven't looked at > the details (and thus there are no patches), but I'd like to point out > the resu

[buildrobot] First results of running contrib/config-list.mk

2013-11-25 Thread Jan-Benedict Glaw
Hi! The two build robot instances that schedule jobs using contrib/config-list.mk are done with two rounds. I haven't looked at the details (and thus there are no patches), but I'd like to point out the results. Depending on the host, gcc/g++ is: gcc20: g++ (GCC) 4.9.

Re: Running contrib/config-list.mk from the buildbots

2013-11-19 Thread Diego Novillo
On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 3:36 PM, Joern Rennecke wrote: > On 19 November 2013 18:20, Diego Novillo wrote: > >> Right, because you're using 4.8. These warnings disappear when using >> trunk and/or do not actually break the build. I suppose this is too >> much for the buildbot then? It won't have

Re: Running contrib/config-list.mk from the buildbots

2013-11-19 Thread Joern Rennecke
On 19 November 2013 18:20, Diego Novillo wrote: > Right, because you're using 4.8. These warnings disappear when using > trunk and/or do not actually break the build. I suppose this is too > much for the buildbot then? It won't have a recent trunk around, so > perhaps restricting it to the tar

Re: Running contrib/config-list.mk from the buildbots

2013-11-19 Thread Jan-Benedict Glaw
On Tue, 2013-11-19 13:20:41 -0500, Diego Novillo wrote: > On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 1:11 PM, Jan-Benedict Glaw wrote: > > On Tue, 2013-11-19 12:08:05 -0500, Diego Novillo > > wrote: > > [conffig-list.mk] > >> Really, the only thing interesting about the script is the broad set > >> of targets it

Re: Running contrib/config-list.mk from the buildbots

2013-11-19 Thread Diego Novillo
On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 1:11 PM, Jan-Benedict Glaw wrote: > On Tue, 2013-11-19 12:08:05 -0500, Diego Novillo wrote: > [conffig-list.mk] >> Really, the only thing interesting about the script is the broad set >> of targets it uses. If you just added them to the schedule of builds, >> that should b

Re: Running contrib/config-list.mk from the buildbots

2013-11-19 Thread Jan-Benedict Glaw
On Tue, 2013-11-19 12:08:05 -0500, Diego Novillo wrote: [conffig-list.mk] > Really, the only thing interesting about the script is the broad set > of targets it uses. If you just added them to the schedule of builds, > that should be sufficient. We could even decide not to add all of > them. And c

Re: Running contrib/config-list.mk from the buildbots

2013-11-19 Thread Jan-Benedict Glaw
On Tue, 2013-11-19 12:08:05 -0500, Diego Novillo wrote: > On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 12:03 PM, Jan-Benedict Glaw wrote: > > On Tue, 2013-11-19 10:20:48 -0500, Diego Novillo > > wrote: [config-list.mk] > >> Would this be hard to set up in your buildbots? > > > > I haven't ever directly used config-

Re: Running contrib/config-list.mk from the buildbots

2013-11-19 Thread Diego Novillo
On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 12:03 PM, Jan-Benedict Glaw wrote: > Hi Diego! > > On Tue, 2013-11-19 10:20:48 -0500, Diego Novillo wrote: >> I've been thinking that it would be very useful for buildbots to run >> contrib/config-list.mk. This tests stage1's all-gcc

Re: Running contrib/config-list.mk from the buildbots

2013-11-19 Thread Jan-Benedict Glaw
Hi Diego! On Tue, 2013-11-19 10:20:48 -0500, Diego Novillo wrote: > I've been thinking that it would be very useful for buildbots to run > contrib/config-list.mk. This tests stage1's all-gcc on a very wide > collection of targets. It builds everything with -Werror, so it >

Re: Running contrib/config-list.mk from the buildbots

2013-11-19 Thread Steven Bosscher
On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 4:20 PM, Diego Novillo wrote: > Currently, many targets are broken because of -Werror. I was thinking > of fixing them, but unless we keep them clean with a buildbot they > will regress. How nobel. But isn't this what we have port maintainers for? I'd say: Let it be! If a

Re: Running contrib/config-list.mk from the buildbots

2013-11-19 Thread Diego Novillo
On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 10:29 AM, Sebastian Huber wrote: > On 2013-11-19 16:20, Diego Novillo wrote: >> >> I've been thinking that it would be very useful for buildbots to run >> contrib/config-list.mk. This tests stage1's all-gcc on a very wide >> collection

Re: Running contrib/config-list.mk from the buildbots

2013-11-19 Thread Sebastian Huber
On 2013-11-19 16:20, Diego Novillo wrote: I've been thinking that it would be very useful for buildbots to run contrib/config-list.mk. This tests stage1's all-gcc on a very wide collection of targets. It builds everything with -Werror, so it requires a recent host compiler (ideally tr

Running contrib/config-list.mk from the buildbots

2013-11-19 Thread Diego Novillo
I've been thinking that it would be very useful for buildbots to run contrib/config-list.mk. This tests stage1's all-gcc on a very wide collection of targets. It builds everything with -Werror, so it requires a recent host compiler (ideally trunk or the latest release). Currently, ma

Re: contrib/config-list.mk

2012-09-12 Thread Joseph S. Myers
On Tue, 11 Sep 2012, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: > I don't know whether contrib/config-list.mk is dead or not. But I do > know that you will only get that error on Debian or Ubuntu systems, > which by default pass some rather aggressive warning options. contrib/config-list.mk is me

Re: contrib/config-list.mk

2012-09-11 Thread Joern Rennecke
Quoting Ian Lance Taylor : On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 3:18 PM, Lawrence Crowl wrote: The contrib/config-list.mk tool appears to be suffering from bitrot. The make failures for a limited subset of configurations consisted exclusively of: cc1: warnings being treated as errors ../../../../gcc

Re: contrib/config-list.mk

2012-09-11 Thread Ian Lance Taylor
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 3:18 PM, Lawrence Crowl wrote: > The contrib/config-list.mk tool appears to be suffering from bitrot. > The make failures for a limited subset of configurations consisted > exclusively of: > > cc1: warnings being treated as errors > ../../../../gcc/fixinc

contrib/config-list.mk

2012-09-11 Thread Lawrence Crowl
The contrib/config-list.mk tool appears to be suffering from bitrot. The make failures for a limited subset of configurations consisted exclusively of: cc1: warnings being treated as errors ../../../../gcc/fixincludes/server.c: In function 'server_setup': ../../../../gcc/fixincludes/se