* Re: Results of a multi-build (not good)
2002-03-11 10:52 Results of a multi-build (not good) Richard Earnshaw
@ 2002-03-11 11:08 ` Andrew Cagney
2002-03-12 2:12 ` Richard Earnshaw
2002-03-11 12:02 ` Andrew Cagney
` (3 subsequent siblings)
4 siblings, 1 reply; 17+ messages in thread
From: Andrew Cagney @ 2002-03-11 11:08 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Richard.Earnshaw; +Cc: gdb
What was the build machine? This testing is, unfortunatly, very very
sensative to the host.
Andrew
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread* Re: Results of a multi-build (not good)
2002-03-11 10:52 Results of a multi-build (not good) Richard Earnshaw
2002-03-11 11:08 ` Andrew Cagney
@ 2002-03-11 12:02 ` Andrew Cagney
2002-03-12 2:14 ` Richard Earnshaw
2002-03-11 22:13 ` Eli Zaretskii
` (2 subsequent siblings)
4 siblings, 1 reply; 17+ messages in thread
From: Andrew Cagney @ 2002-03-11 12:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Richard.Earnshaw; +Cc: gdb
I just relooked at the coma tweak:
x86-64 (--target=x86_64-linux-gnu, broken)
It should be just:
x86-64 (--target=x86_64-linux-gnu broken)
if you look at other examples:
sh --target=sh-hms,sh-elf ,-Werror
The first ``,'' is to separate the targets:
sh-hms
sh-elf
The ``,'' in ,-Werror is part of the list of flags vis:
--enable-gdb-build-warnings=,-Werror
The ``--target=x86_64-linux-gnu, broken'' line confuses that bit of awk
(but you won't notice if the output of the script is fed to ``grep -v
broken''.
Andrew
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread* Re: Results of a multi-build (not good)
2002-03-11 10:52 Results of a multi-build (not good) Richard Earnshaw
2002-03-11 11:08 ` Andrew Cagney
2002-03-11 12:02 ` Andrew Cagney
@ 2002-03-11 22:13 ` Eli Zaretskii
2002-03-12 9:11 ` Andrew Cagney
2002-03-12 3:14 ` Richard Earnshaw
2002-03-14 6:06 ` Richard Earnshaw
4 siblings, 1 reply; 17+ messages in thread
From: Eli Zaretskii @ 2002-03-11 22:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Richard.Earnshaw; +Cc: gdb
On Mon, 11 Mar 2002, Richard Earnshaw wrote:
> that build successfully. Not a surprise then to find that, with the
> exception of vax-dec-vms5.5, these are the only ports that don't use
> -Werror.
IMHO, -Werror is a Bad Idea (tm). With the current trend in GCC and
other compilers to print warnings for perfectly valid C, -Werror tends to
break good code with every new release of GCC, to say nothing of
development snapshots people use.
I think we should stop using -Werror, except maybe in maintainer's mode.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* Re: Results of a multi-build (not good)
2002-03-11 22:13 ` Eli Zaretskii
@ 2002-03-12 9:11 ` Andrew Cagney
2002-03-12 11:24 ` Eli Zaretskii
0 siblings, 1 reply; 17+ messages in thread
From: Andrew Cagney @ 2002-03-12 9:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Eli Zaretskii; +Cc: Richard.Earnshaw, gdb
> On Mon, 11 Mar 2002, Richard Earnshaw wrote:
>
>
>> that build successfully. Not a surprise then to find that, with the
>> exception of vax-dec-vms5.5, these are the only ports that don't use
>> -Werror.
>
>
> IMHO, -Werror is a Bad Idea (tm). With the current trend in GCC and
> other compilers to print warnings for perfectly valid C, -Werror tends to
> break good code with every new release of GCC, to say nothing of
> development snapshots people use.
>
> I think we should stop using -Werror, except maybe in maintainer's mode.
-Werror is only enabled when someone explicitly specifies it with
--enable-gdb-warnings=,-Werror.
I don't think -Werror on its own is a problem. Rather, I think things
go wrong when it is combined with some options (-Wunused-param) or
headers (solaris 1.5.1 was bad). This is also why it isn't enabled by
default and only a very select set of options are included.
BTW, I currently get only one (valid) failure when doing a build on
{Free,Net}BSD.
enjoy,
Andrew
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread* Re: Results of a multi-build (not good)
2002-03-12 9:11 ` Andrew Cagney
@ 2002-03-12 11:24 ` Eli Zaretskii
2002-03-13 2:00 ` Richard Earnshaw
0 siblings, 1 reply; 17+ messages in thread
From: Eli Zaretskii @ 2002-03-12 11:24 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: ac131313; +Cc: Richard.Earnshaw, gdb
> Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2002 12:11:05 -0500
> From: Andrew Cagney <ac131313@cygnus.com>
> >
> > IMHO, -Werror is a Bad Idea (tm). With the current trend in GCC and
> > other compilers to print warnings for perfectly valid C, -Werror tends to
> > break good code with every new release of GCC, to say nothing of
> > development snapshots people use.
> >
> > I think we should stop using -Werror, except maybe in maintainer's mode.
>
> -Werror is only enabled when someone explicitly specifies it with
> --enable-gdb-warnings=,-Werror.
Then how come Richard has failures on platforms that didn't use
that? Richard, did you enable -Werror explicitly?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* Re: Results of a multi-build (not good)
2002-03-12 11:24 ` Eli Zaretskii
@ 2002-03-13 2:00 ` Richard Earnshaw
0 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: Richard Earnshaw @ 2002-03-13 2:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Eli Zaretskii; +Cc: ac131313, Richard.Earnshaw, gdb
> > > I think we should stop using -Werror, except maybe in maintainer's mode.
> >
> > -Werror is only enabled when someone explicitly specifies it with
> > --enable-gdb-warnings=,-Werror.
>
> Then how come Richard has failures on platforms that didn't use
> that? Richard, did you enable -Werror explicitly?
I'm using the specifications extracted from the MAINTAINERS file with the
awk script listed there.
R.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* Re: Results of a multi-build (not good)
2002-03-11 10:52 Results of a multi-build (not good) Richard Earnshaw
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2002-03-11 22:13 ` Eli Zaretskii
@ 2002-03-12 3:14 ` Richard Earnshaw
2002-03-12 9:35 ` Andrew Cagney
2002-03-14 6:06 ` Richard Earnshaw
4 siblings, 1 reply; 17+ messages in thread
From: Richard Earnshaw @ 2002-03-12 3:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gdb; +Cc: Richard.Earnshaw
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 496 bytes --]
I've been asked if I could release the multi-build script. It's attached
below.
Note that it only builds the debuggers, it doesn't run any tests on them.
To do that I would need to build and install about 36 sets of complete
tool chains, which I just don't have space for. Further, most of them
wouldn't be much use without either a simulator or a real piece of
hardware to test them on.
You will need to tweak the variables at the top of the script to your
local configuration.
R.
[-- Attachment #2: build_gdb_all --]
[-- Type: text/x-script , Size: 2994 bytes --]
#! /bin/sh
# Copyright (C) 2002 Free Software Foundation.
#
# This file is part of GDB.
#
# GDB is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify
# it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by
# the Free Software Foundation; either version 2, or (at your option)
# any later version.
#
# GDB is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
# but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
# MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the
# GNU General Public License for more details.
#
# You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License
# along with GDB; see the file COPYING. If not, write to
# the Free Software Foundation, 59 Temple Place - Suite 330,
# Boston, MA 02111-1307, USA.
#
########################################################################
#
# VARIOUS OPTIONS YOU WILL NEED TO CONFIGURE FOR LOCAL USE
# Where builds will live
builddir=/home/rearnsha/gnu/gdb-allcross
# Where the sources live
srcdir=/home/rearnsha/gnusrc/utils/src
# Where logs will go. NB. Must not be a sub-dir of builddir or you
# will loose them.
logdir=/home/rearnsha/gnu/gdb-logdir
# Must be GNU awk
awk=awk
# Where to look for the list of targets to test
maintainers=${srcdir}/gdb/MAINTAINERS
# Version of make to use; must be GNU make for parallel makes
make=gnumake
# Number of parallel make jobs
par="10"
# END OF CONFIGURATION OPTIONS
#
########################################################################
# Get the list of targets and the build options
alltarg=`${awk} < "${maintainers}" '
$2 ~ /--target=.*/ {
targets = gensub (/^.*--target=/, "", 1, $2)
warnings = gensub (/[)]*$/, "", 1, $3)
split (targets, targ, /,/)
for (i in targ) {
print targ[i], warnings
}
}'`
# Back up the log files
cd ${logdir}
if [ -f build.out ]
then
mv build.out build.old
fi
if [ -f config.out ]
then
mv config.out config.old
fi
if [ -f fail.sum ]
then
mv fail.sum fail.old
fi
if [ ! -d ${builddir} ]
then
echo ${builddir} does not exist
exit 1
fi
cd ${builddir}
MAKE=${make}
export MAKE
jobs=1
# For each target, configure and build it.
while read targ opts
do
if [ ${opts} != "broken" ]
then
trap 'echo cleaning up ...; rm -rf ${builddir}/*; exit 1' 1 2 15
echo ${targ}
mkdir ${targ}
cd ${targ}
${srcdir}/configure --target=$targ \
--enable-gdb-build-warnings=$opts \
>> ${logdir}/config.tout.$targ 2>&1 &
cd ..
jobs=`expr ${jobs} + 1`
if [ ${jobs} -gt ${par} ]
then
wait
jobs=1
fi
fi
done << EOF
$alltarg
EOF
wait
cat ${logdir}/config.tout.* > ${logdir}/config.out
rm -f ${logdir}/config.tout.*
for targ in *
do
cd $targ
if ${make} -j ${par} all-gdb >> ${logdir}/build.out 2>&1
then
true
else
echo ">>>>>>>>>>>>>" >> ${logdir}/fail.sum
echo "$targ (${opts})" >> ${logdir}/fail.sum
tail -20 ${logdir}/build.out >> ${logdir}/fail.sum
echo >> ${logdir}/fail.sum
echo $targ build failed
fi
rm -rf *
cd ..
done
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread* Re: Results of a multi-build (not good)
2002-03-12 3:14 ` Richard Earnshaw
@ 2002-03-12 9:35 ` Andrew Cagney
2002-03-12 9:45 ` Richard Earnshaw
0 siblings, 1 reply; 17+ messages in thread
From: Andrew Cagney @ 2002-03-12 9:35 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Richard.Earnshaw; +Cc: gdb
> I've been asked if I could release the multi-build script. It's attached
> below.
>
> Note that it only builds the debuggers, it doesn't run any tests on them.
> To do that I would need to build and install about 36 sets of complete
> tool chains, which I just don't have space for. Further, most of them
> wouldn't be much use without either a simulator or a real piece of
> hardware to test them on.
>
> You will need to tweak the variables at the top of the script to your
> local configuration.
Nice. Having a script to run is going to be easier than pointing at
that awk.
One tweak is to try starting each GDB after it is built - this catches
many multi-arch problems. Having the script restartable (and leave
around broken builds) can also be useful.
Andrew
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* Re: Results of a multi-build (not good)
2002-03-12 9:35 ` Andrew Cagney
@ 2002-03-12 9:45 ` Richard Earnshaw
0 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: Richard Earnshaw @ 2002-03-12 9:45 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andrew Cagney; +Cc: Richard.Earnshaw, gdb
> > I've been asked if I could release the multi-build script. It's attached
> > below.
> >
> > Note that it only builds the debuggers, it doesn't run any tests on them.
> > To do that I would need to build and install about 36 sets of complete
> > tool chains, which I just don't have space for. Further, most of them
> > wouldn't be much use without either a simulator or a real piece of
> > hardware to test them on.
> >
> > You will need to tweak the variables at the top of the script to your
> > local configuration.
>
>
> Nice. Having a script to run is going to be easier than pointing at
> that awk.
>
> One tweak is to try starting each GDB after it is built - this catches
> many multi-arch problems. Having the script restartable (and leave
> around broken builds) can also be useful.
These are all useful possibilities. Unfortunately, I don't have enough
disk quota to leave that many builds lying around. So I have to clean up
after each one.
Anyway, you're free to do with the script whatever you want (within the
constraints of the GPL :-)
R.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* Re: Results of a multi-build (not good)
2002-03-11 10:52 Results of a multi-build (not good) Richard Earnshaw
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2002-03-12 3:14 ` Richard Earnshaw
@ 2002-03-14 6:06 ` Richard Earnshaw
2002-03-23 10:45 ` Andrew Cagney
4 siblings, 1 reply; 17+ messages in thread
From: Richard Earnshaw @ 2002-03-14 6:06 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gdb; +Cc: Richard.Earnshaw
rearnsha@arm.com said:
> I've just tried my multi-build script out which uses the
> configurations specified in the MAINTAINERS file. The results aren't
> particularly encouraging:
So with my recent patch for PR 409 applied, things look a little more rosy:
fr30-elf build failed
m32r-elf build failed
mn10300-elf build failed
powerpc-eabi build failed
sh-elf build failed
v850-elf build failed
fr30-elf:
/home/rearnsha/gnusrc/utils/src/sim/fr30/traps.c:22:23: targ-vals.h: No such file or directory
m32r-elf:
/bin/sh /home/rearnsha/gnusrc/utils/src/sim/m32r/../../move-if-change eng.hin engx.h
/bin/sh /home/rearnsha/gnusrc/utils/src/sim/m32r/../../move-if-change mloop.cin mloopx.c
/bin/sh /home/rearnsha/gnusrc/utils/src/sim/m32r/../../move-if-change eng.hin eng.h
mv: cannot stat `eng.hin': No such file or directory
mn10300-elf:
/home/rearnsha/gnusrc/utils/src/sim/mn10300/sim-main.h:43:20: itable.h: No such file or directory
/home/rearnsha/gnusrc/utils/src/sim/mn10300/sim-main.h:44:21: idecode.h: No such file or directory
/home/rearnsha/gnusrc/utils/src/sim/mn10300/sim-main.h:45:21: idecode.h: No such file or directory
powerpc-eabi:
gnumake[2]: *** No rule to make target `hw.h', needed by `corefile.o'. Stop.
sh-elf:
cc1: warnings being treated as errors
/home/rearnsha/gnusrc/utils/src/gdb/remote-e7000.c: In function `write_small':
/home/rearnsha/gnusrc/utils/src/gdb/remote-e7000.c:1088: warning: long unsigned int format, different type arg (arg 3)
/home/rearnsha/gnusrc/utils/src/gdb/remote-e7000.c:1094: warning: long unsigned int format, different type arg (arg 3)
/home/rearnsha/gnusrc/utils/src/gdb/remote-e7000.c: In function `e7000_read_inferior_memory':
/home/rearnsha/gnusrc/utils/src/gdb/remote-e7000.c:1247: warning: long unsigned int format, different type arg (arg 3)
/home/rearnsha/gnusrc/utils/src/gdb/remote-e7000.c: In function `e7000_read_inferior_memory_large':
/home/rearnsha/gnusrc/utils/src/gdb/remote-e7000.c:1326: warning: long unsigned int format, different type arg (arg 3)
/home/rearnsha/gnusrc/utils/src/gdb/remote-e7000.c:1326: warning: long unsigned int format, different type arg (arg 4)
/home/rearnsha/gnusrc/utils/src/gdb/remote-e7000.c: In function `e7000_insert_breakpoint':
/home/rearnsha/gnusrc/utils/src/gdb/remote-e7000.c:1708: warning: long unsigned int format, different type arg (arg 4)
/home/rearnsha/gnusrc/utils/src/gdb/remote-e7000.c:1713: warning: long unsigned int format, different type arg (arg 3)
/home/rearnsha/gnusrc/utils/src/gdb/remote-e7000.c: In function `e7000_remove_breakpoint':
/home/rearnsha/gnusrc/utils/src/gdb/remote-e7000.c:1752: warning: long unsigned int format, different type arg (arg 3)
/home/rearnsha/gnusrc/utils/src/gdb/remote-e7000.c:1770: warning: long unsigned int format, different type arg (arg 2)
v850-elf:
/home/rearnsha/gnusrc/utils/src/sim/v850/interp.c:5:20: itable.h: No such file or directory
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread* Re: Results of a multi-build (not good)
2002-03-14 6:06 ` Richard Earnshaw
@ 2002-03-23 10:45 ` Andrew Cagney
2002-03-23 10:52 ` Richard Earnshaw
0 siblings, 1 reply; 17+ messages in thread
From: Andrew Cagney @ 2002-03-23 10:45 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Richard.Earnshaw; +Cc: gdb
> rearnsha@arm.com said:
>
>> I've just tried my multi-build script out which uses the
>> configurations specified in the MAINTAINERS file. The results aren't
>> particularly encouraging:
>
>
> So with my recent patch for PR 409 applied, things look a little more rosy:
>
> fr30-elf build failed
> m32r-elf build failed
> mn10300-elf build failed
> powerpc-eabi build failed
> sh-elf build failed
> v850-elf build failed
Richard,
Using Red Hat Linux 7.2, I got:
sh-elf (will change to -w and file separate bug report)
xstormy16-elf (totally puzzling, it didn't configure!)
but not the others. The only problem I can think of, off hand, is gmake
vs make (but this is GNU/Linux) or related (configured with absolute vs
relative paths?).
puzzled,
Andrew
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* Re: Results of a multi-build (not good)
2002-03-23 10:45 ` Andrew Cagney
@ 2002-03-23 10:52 ` Richard Earnshaw
2002-03-23 11:33 ` Andrew Cagney
0 siblings, 1 reply; 17+ messages in thread
From: Richard Earnshaw @ 2002-03-23 10:52 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andrew Cagney; +Cc: Richard.Earnshaw, gdb
> > rearnsha@arm.com said:
> >
> >> I've just tried my multi-build script out which uses the
> >> configurations specified in the MAINTAINERS file. The results aren't
> >> particularly encouraging:
> >
> >
> > So with my recent patch for PR 409 applied, things look a little more rosy:
> >
> > fr30-elf build failed
> > m32r-elf build failed
> > mn10300-elf build failed
> > powerpc-eabi build failed
> > sh-elf build failed
> > v850-elf build failed
>
> Richard,
>
> Using Red Hat Linux 7.2, I got:
>
> sh-elf (will change to -w and file separate bug report)
> xstormy16-elf (totally puzzling, it didn't configure!)
>
> but not the others. The only problem I can think of, off hand, is gmake
> vs make (but this is GNU/Linux) or related (configured with absolute vs
> relative paths?).
I was using -j10 on the make. Maybe it's missing dependencies.
R.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* Re: Results of a multi-build (not good)
2002-03-23 10:52 ` Richard Earnshaw
@ 2002-03-23 11:33 ` Andrew Cagney
0 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: Andrew Cagney @ 2002-03-23 11:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Richard.Earnshaw; +Cc: gdb
> Richard,
>>
>> Using Red Hat Linux 7.2, I got:
>>
>> sh-elf (will change to -w and file separate bug report)
>> xstormy16-elf (totally puzzling, it didn't configure!)
>>
>> but not the others. The only problem I can think of, off hand, is gmake
>> vs make (but this is GNU/Linux) or related (configured with absolute vs
>> relative paths?).
>
>
> I was using -j10 on the make. Maybe it's missing dependencies.
>
> R.
Ah, yes. The sim directories have a reputation for poor dependency
specs. New separate bug.
Andrew
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread