On Sat, May 16, 2020 at 9:02 PM Rob Savoye <r...@welcomehome.org> wrote: > > On 5/16/20 5:45 PM, Maciej W. Rozycki wrote: > > > Overall perhaps a patch management system might be good having to make > > chasing patches easier, such as patchwork, and we already use Git, so we > > As an old GNU project, we're required to use what the FSF prefers, > which is on savannah. https://savannah.gnu.org/patch/?group=dejagnu, Our > bug tracker is there their too. We've used that for a long time. Yes, > patches in email are harder to track. > > > fresh patchwork? The patch traffic is surely much lower with DejaGnu than > > it is with glibc, and there would be no data to migrate (but we might want > > to feed a couple of months' back worth of mailing list traffic). > > I'm now building up the infrastructure to properly test patches, but > it's not enough to do the next release. All I have these days is my > laptop and a PI B3+. I'd need access to more hardware as some of the > patches effect cross testing, or get others to test the release candidates.
You should be able to use the gcc compilefarm too for this purpose (https://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/CompileFarm). Thanks, Andrew > > Much of the problems with cross testing are often obscure timing > problems. It's amazing how sometimes a minor unrelated change changes > the timing and things break... To do a release properly requires > duplicating that level of infrastructure for at least several targets > and several toolchain release, and built on more than one GNU/Linux distro. > > It'll take most of the week to really get a good base setup with > baseline test results, but some of the patches like the DejaGnu > testsuite ones will go in first since they don't effect the toolchain. > > Jacob already added 9 patches to our site. I'm still building cross > compilers since some of his patches effect cross testing. I did add ADA > to my builds, which isn't a normal build default, since I thought some > of the patches for ADA. > > - rob - > --- > https://www.senecass.com