Re: I volunteer

Christophe Lyon <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.comp.sysutils.dejagnu.general
Message-ID <CAKdteOZQzdNW354RmDGEhUut4UhK28k+Ao-yuY=PT9aJHCA5jw@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, 19 May 2020 at 00:36, Jacob Bachmeyer <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Rob Savoye wrote:
> > On 5/18/20 2:16 PM, Jacob Bachmeyer wrote:
> >
> >> My work on DejaGnu is one of my hobbies.  However, DejaGnu is a
> >> relatively stable project, so I do not expect it to require much time.
> >>
> >
> >   To adequately test DejaGnu, you need to be able to build and test the
> > GNU toolchain, both native and cross. That's necessary to test patches,
> > or reproduce bugs. Once all that is setup, then yes testing patches
> > isn't too time consuming. Building several toolchains and setting up
> > cross testing is what sucks up most of the time. You don't need to be a
> > toolchain developer, but you do need to be able to work in that environment.
> >
> What is the minimal set needed for sufficient testing?  (Which
> packages?  GCC, GDB, ...?  How many versions?  Latest release/Past three
> releases/All supported releases/Something else?  I have/have access to
> AMD64 (with 32-bit compatibility available); otherwise I will need to
> ask for an account on the GCC Compile Farm Andrew Pinski mentioned.)
>
> How to run the testsuites with a testing version of DejaGnu?  Is it as
> simple as specifying
> "RUNTEST=/path/to/testing/version/of/dejagnu/runtest" as an argument to
I generally do:
PATH=/path/to/testing-dejagnu:$PATH make check

IIRC, that's what ABE does too.

> "make check"?  Is running diff on the *.log (or *.sum) files after
> running "make check" with both "old" and "new" DejaGnu sufficient to
> verify a proposed release?
>
> >   Luckily you can use my ABE tool (also GPLv3), which I built for
> > Linaro, and it fully automates the process of building and testing
> > native or cross toolchains.
> It seems to have disappeared from the Linaro wiki... is it currently
> posted anywhere?
ABE is still there:
https://git.linaro.org/toolchain/abe.git/

> >  I agree you've been deeper into the DejaGnu
> > code than anybody else these days, but unless you run the toolchain
> > testsuites in a cross build from git, you can never really be sure if
> > something doesn't break in obscure ways. Maybe others disagree with me
> > on this, but testing the toolchain is the primary purpose of DejaGnu.
> >
> Are released versions sufficient or do the tests also need to be run
> with Git checkouts of the toolchain packages?
>
> >   I'm open to an additional co-maintainer if you can survive getting
> > fully setup. ABE makes it easy, you just need a ton of disk space. While
> > it is possible to add bug fixes or features without much toolchain
> > testing, it's impossible to do a stable release without it. With
> > DejaGnu, all releases are long-term support... and we will  need to do a
> > release after the patch backlog is caught up.
> >
> Part of the reason I am now involved with writing tests for DejaGnu
> itself is to reduce this burden.  Right now, the only way to know if a
> change causes problems is to run numerous testsuites for other (large)
> packages and "see if it breaks".
>

I'll let Rob/Ben comment on what is "sufficient" testing, I believe
GDB is the most challenging.

Christophe

>
> -- Jacob
>
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.