On 29 June 2012 04:59, Mike Stump <mikest...@comcast.net> wrote: > On Jun 28, 2012, at 5:15 PM, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer wrote: >> On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 04:43:05PM -0700, Mike Stump wrote: >>> On Jun 28, 2012, at 3:27 PM, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer wrote: >>>> Perhaps you want to pursue this? We'd need to suggest this to dejagnu, >>> >>> Actually, we have the technology, so that isn't necessary. :-) You can >>> install replacements for any procs you want, not pretty, but... it does >>> work. I think this is a more deterministic path forward than waiting for a >>> mythical dejagnu release. Also, we then can avoid the hassle of requiring >>> a new dejagnu. >> >> Wouldn't that mean that we have to completely replace proc load_lib? > > Yes; worse, it is a cut-n-paste from dejagnu and can effectively rev lock us > to the current dejagnu release... One can delegate, but I don't think any > pre or post processing in this case is enough to `fix' the issue, so it would > be a wholesale replacement.
Ben, Would you accept something like the patch in the message below into dejagnu? http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2012-03/msg00094.html Above patch was motivated by these (unpleasant) observations: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2012-03/msg00092.html thanks, > >> But anyway. >> Mike, it would be nice if you could fix >>> +# BUG: gcc-dg calls gcc-set-multilib-library-path but does not load >>> gcc-defs! > > Sounds like a single line fix. It is the testing of that fix that is the > annoying part.
