On Sep 19, 2011, at 4:04 PM, Neil Puttock wrote: > On 19 September 2011 13:05, [email protected] <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Perhaps create two new make options: >> >> make unsafe-test-baseline >> >> and >> >> make unsafe-check >> >> These would not have the fail-if-unoptimized check. >> Then, one would need to make a change to GUB such that, when it runs the >> regtests, it uses the unsafe commands. >> >> Does this seem like a good solution? > > I'm probably not the person to ask. I'd never use the unsafe-* versions. > > Cheers, > Neil >
Graham - how difficult would it be to change LilyPond's build in GUB such that it used different commands to run its regtests? Also, it may be worth it to consider scrapping optimized binary altogether - it'd be good to test how much overhead the unoptimized version introduces with respect to the optimized version. Cheers, MS _______________________________________________ bug-lilypond mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
