On Thu, 23 Apr 2015, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer wrote:
> I've done the above some time ago, dejagnu >= 1.5.2 has a "libdirs"
> variable so i'd like to propose to:
>
> - Bump the required dejagnu version for gcc-6 to (let's say) 1.5.3
1.5.2 is only a few months old. I suggest waiting until a given
On 16 March 2012 at 11:04, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer
wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 08:35:47PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>>On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 05:56:32PM +0100, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer wrote:
>>> On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 04:57:12PM +0100, Richard Guenther wrote:
>>> >On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at
Hi Bernhard,
> Would you accept something like the patch in the message below into dejagnu?
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2012-03/msg00094.html
Yes, I'm happy to fix this limitation. However, your patch isn't
complete .. you need to update the documentation, testsuite, etc.
Please send a revis
On 29 June 2012 04:59, Mike Stump 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
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 technolo
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
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 th
Rehi Janis,
Good to see you active again :)
Perhaps you want to pursue this? We'd need to suggest this to dejagnu,
have it in a release and bump the minimum required deja version of gcc.
So it may take time but IMO would be a worthwhile cleanup.
Or do you see a better way to handle this properly?
On Apr 13, 2012, at 7:39 AM, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 13, 2012 at 06:57:44AM -0700, Mike Stump wrote:
>> On Apr 13, 2012, at 3:51 AM, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer wrote:
>>> Ping.
>>
>> Before advancing, has the problem that Rainer pointed out on March 19th with
>> your earlier p
On Fri, Apr 13, 2012 at 06:57:44AM -0700, Mike Stump wrote:
>On Apr 13, 2012, at 3:51 AM, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer wrote:
>> Ping.
>
>Before advancing, has the problem that Rainer pointed out on March 19th with
>your earlier patch been fixed?
I believe that it is fixed, yes. See r185688 and my fo
On Apr 3, 2012, at 5:16 AM, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer wrote:
> The second part of implicitly doing cleanup-modules is to remove the now
> superfluous dg-final directives.
Ok once the issue Rainer pointed out is addressed. As for the ChangeLog, I'd
be tempted to list them as:
* gfortran.d
On Apr 13, 2012, at 3:51 AM, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer wrote:
> Ping.
Before advancing, has the problem that Rainer pointed out on March 19th with
your earlier patch been fixed?
On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 06:36:12PM +0100, Rainer Orth wrote:
>Unfortunately, this patch creates a bogus warning in the libgomp
>testsuite, which also shows up in mail-report.log:
>
>WARNING: Line 30 includes unreadable file
>\`/vol/gcc/src/hg/trunk/local/libgomp/testsuite/libgomp.fortran/omp_lib.
Bernhard Reutner-Fischer writes:
> On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 08:35:47PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>>On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 05:56:32PM +0100, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer wrote:
>>> On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 04:57:12PM +0100, Richard Guenther wrote:
>>> >On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 1:39 PM, Bernhard Reutne
On Fri, Mar 16, 2012 at 11:04:45AM +0100, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer wrote:
>The underlying problem is that dejagnu's runtest.exp only allows for a
>single "libdir" where it searches for includes -- see comment in
>libgomp.exp and libitm.exp
>
>While just adding more and more load_gcc_lib calls to u
On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 08:35:47PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 05:56:32PM +0100, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer wrote:
>> On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 04:57:12PM +0100, Richard Guenther wrote:
>> >On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 1:39 PM, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer
>> > wrote:
>>
>> >> committe
On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 05:56:32PM +0100, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 04:57:12PM +0100, Richard Guenther wrote:
> >On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 1:39 PM, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer
> > wrote:
>
> >> committed as r185430.
> >
> >You forgot to add fortran-modules.exp :(
>
> co
On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 04:57:12PM +0100, Richard Guenther wrote:
>On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 1:39 PM, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer
> wrote:
>> committed as r185430.
>
>You forgot to add fortran-modules.exp :(
committed as r185439.
I am very sorry for that..
>
>That breaks final testing result it seems
On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 1:39 PM, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer
wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 01:30:29PM -0700, Mike Stump wrote:
>>On Mar 13, 2012, at 9:38 AM, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer wrote:
>>> Could some of the testsuite maintainers please eyeball?
>>
>>I've eyed it, the only thing that stood out
On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 01:30:29PM -0700, Mike Stump wrote:
>On Mar 13, 2012, at 9:38 AM, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer wrote:
>> Could some of the testsuite maintainers please eyeball?
>
>I've eyed it, the only thing that stood out was:
>
>-foreach testcase [lsort [glob -nocomplain $srcdir/$subdir/*.F]
On Mar 13, 2012, at 9:38 AM, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer wrote:
> Could some of the testsuite maintainers please eyeball?
I've eyed it, the only thing that stood out was:
-foreach testcase [lsort [glob -nocomplain $srcdir/$subdir/*.F]] {
-if ![runtest_file_p $runtests $testcase] then {
- c
On Fri, Mar 09, 2012 at 01:02:01AM +0100, Mikael Morin wrote:
>On 01/03/2012 22:09, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> By now we have quite some leftover modules in the testsuite, again.
>> Given that the previous suggestion in this thread -- to have a separate
>> script in contrib -- di
On 01/03/2012 22:09, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer wrote:
> Hi,
>
> By now we have quite some leftover modules in the testsuite, again.
> Given that the previous suggestion in this thread -- to have a separate
> script in contrib -- did not trigger any reaction, let me suggest the
> patch below instead
23 matches
Mail list logo
