Long double complex methods

Joel Sherrill joel.sherrill@oarcorp.com
Thu Jun 29 16:31:00 GMT 2017

On 6/29/2017 11:18 AM, Joseph Myers wrote:
> On Wed, 28 Jun 2017, Joel Sherrill wrote:
>> Also, although I don't know how to run them, doesn't someone
>> run glibc tests on newlib? They likely have tests for this for
>> newlib's purposes.
> It would be interesting to see results of glibc libm tests (current git
> please, there have been major changes since the last release) for a range
> of libm implementations and operating systems, but also probably a lot of
> work to get them building with other C libraries; they make plenty of use
> of glibc features, include some internal glibc headers for configuration
> of some details of the architecture, and hardcode glibc choices of goals
> for errno, exceptions and accuracy that other libm implementations may
> differ on.  An implementation/architecture-specific libm-test-ulps file
> also needs to be generated before you can expect clean results even for an
> implementation following glibc's goals.

That would be interesting. In theory, we should be able to mimic the
internal glibc .h files. The devil is in the detail.

My first order problem is that I have never seen the procedure for running
glibc tests against a newlib based toolset for any newlib target -- embedded,
Cygwin, or Linux.

Heck.. as I posted earlier, I don't even know what to do to run the
tests inside the newlib tree. :(


More information about the Newlib mailing list