[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] GCC v. Arch address@hidden: Regressions on mainline
From: |
Andrew Suffield |
Subject: |
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] GCC v. Arch address@hidden: Regressions on mainline] |
Date: |
Wed, 23 Jun 2004 16:59:54 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.6+20040523i |
On Wed, Jun 23, 2004 at 11:04:59AM -0400, Colin Walters wrote:
> On Wed, 2004-06-23 at 14:36 +0200, Tobias C. Rittweiler wrote:
>
> > Don't test on *every* commit, but firstly pile those [commits] up. Just
> > from time to time do a build-test-cycle:
>
> That breaks the invariant that *every* revision on the mainline passes
> the testsuite. Sometimes you might need to back up by changesets to
> narrow down a bug that *wasn't* found by the test suite. Knowing that
> all the revisions there did currently pass is important.
This is essentially wrong; that invariant is not interesting (and
happens to be completely impossible for gcc and most similar projects;
it only works when the test suite is static). I sketched out a
completely different approach elsewhere in the thread.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ |
`. `' |
`- -><- |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] GCC v. Arch address@hidden: Regressions on mainline], (continued)
- [Gnu-arch-users] round 2 of GCC v. Arch, Tom Lord, 2004/06/23
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] GCC v. Arch address@hidden: Regressions on mainline], Colin Walters, 2004/06/23
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] GCC v. Arch address@hidden: Regressions on mainline], Tobias C. Rittweiler, 2004/06/23
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] GCC v. Arch address@hidden: Regressions on mainline], Colin Walters, 2004/06/23
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] GCC v. Arch address@hidden: Regressions on mainline], Tobias C. Rittweiler, 2004/06/23
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] GCC v. Arch address@hidden: Regressions on mainline], Aaron Bentley, 2004/06/23
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] GCC v. Arch address@hidden: Regressions on mainline],
Andrew Suffield <=
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] GCC v. Arch address@hidden: Regressions on mainline], Stephen J. Turnbull, 2004/06/23
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] GCC v. Arch address@hidden: Regressions on mainline], James Blackwell, 2004/06/23
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] GCC v. Arch address@hidden: Regressions on mainline], Aaron Bentley, 2004/06/23
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] GCC v. Arch address@hidden: Regressions on mainline], Charles Duffy, 2004/06/23
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] GCC v. Arch address@hidden: Regressions on mainline], Andrew Suffield, 2004/06/23
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] GCC v. Arch address@hidden: Regressions on mainline], Tom Lord, 2004/06/23
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] GCC v. Arch address@hidden: Regressions on mainline], Andrew Suffield, 2004/06/23
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] GCC v. Arch address@hidden: Regressions on mainline], Matthew Dempsky, 2004/06/23
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] GCC v. Arch address@hidden: Regressions on mainline], Matthew Dempsky, 2004/06/23
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] GCC v. Arch address@hidden: Regressions on mainline], Erik de Castro Lopo, 2004/06/24