From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 15613 invoked by alias); 23 Jan 2004 00:43:54 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 15605 invoked from network); 23 Jan 2004 00:43:54 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO nevyn.them.org) (66.93.172.17) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 23 Jan 2004 00:43:54 -0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 4.30 #1 (Debian)) id 1AjpQO-0005UB-VI; Thu, 22 Jan 2004 19:43:52 -0500 Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2004 00:43:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Michael Elizabeth Chastain Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: branch comparison tables Message-ID: <20040123004352.GA21031@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Michael Elizabeth Chastain , gdb@sources.redhat.com References: <20040122230758.B60AB4B104@berman.michael-chastain.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20040122230758.B60AB4B104@berman.michael-chastain.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.1i X-SW-Source: 2004-01/txt/msg00262.txt.bz2 On Thu, Jan 22, 2004 at 06:07:58PM -0500, Michael Chastain wrote: > Here are some new tables: > > http://www.shout.net/~mec/sunday/2004-01-19-branch > > This is all four branches (6.0, HEAD, carlton_dictionary-branch, > drow-cplus-branch) run with the test suite from gdb HEAD. > So the compare-by-gdb tables are actually useful here. > > Looking at compare-by-gdb, at the sub-tables with "as=2.14, ld=2.14". > There is not a lot of variation based on the version of binutils. > So sub-tables #2 #3 #6 #7 #10 #11 #16 #17 #22 #23 #28 #29 ought to > cover all the interesting information. > > I would like to do more of this. Conceptually, I've got it worked out > that the version of the gdb test suite and the version of gdb are > independent attributes of a test run. I just have to figure out how to > present it usefully, and then write some more Perl. Neat. By the way, FYI: At this moment, the FAILs (only, not looking at the kfails at the moment) for GCC 3.4 and GCC HEAD are in several categories: - gdb bugs - testsuite bugs - java tests, blah - namespace issue that David is looking at I believe that no more of them are caused by GCC. The multi_line_while_statement failures in your tables were, but I checked in a fix this morning. -- Daniel Jacobowitz MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer