going forward

H . J . Lu hjl@lucon.org
Sat Aug 18 08:04:00 GMT 2001


On Sat, Aug 18, 2001 at 09:51:48AM +0200, Andreas Jaeger wrote:
> Ulrich Drepper <drepper@redhat.com> writes:
> 
> > Roland McGrath <roland@frob.com> writes:
> >
> >> Enough has been done already, that I would hope we could get this fully
> >> resolved by a week from today.
> >
> > I'm not so optimistic.  So far all I have seen are results from people
> > running completely new environments and individual results of running
> > older programs.  Nobody put down which combinations have been tested.
> 
> If we can come up with a way to test stuff, I volunteer to update and
> publish a test matrix and also run those test for GCC 2.95, GCC 3.0.1,
> GCC 3.1 for PowerPC, i686 and S390.
> 
> Note that I'm on holiday monday and tuesday and can do these tests
> only add the end of next week,
> 

Here is something I believe we should test

http://sources.redhat.com/ml/libc-alpha/2001-08/msg00153.html

I don't know if it is complete. Also we need to know exactly how the
libgcc will be changed in the future so that we can test those cases. 
Assuming a new version name, GCC_3.1.2, introduced for _Unwind_Find_FDE
in a future gcc, should we include the new _Unwind_Find_FDE in libc.so
when we recompile glibc with the new gcc? If we do, we should also
test those cases. It is not an easy test.


H.J.



More information about the Libc-hacker mailing list