Smoking different gcc versions

[email protected] (Bram) Mon, 14 Apr 2008 22:55:55 +0200
Newsgroups perl.daily-build
Message-ID <[email protected]>
Hello,


I'm currently playing with smoking different gcc versions.

My question: what would the best approach for this be?

I ran a smoke using a configuration file with:

=3D
-Dcc=3D'ccache gcc'
-Dcc=3D'ccache /tmp/GCC/D/bin/gcc'

The output in mktest.rpt:

darkstar: Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Quad CPU Q6600 @ 2.40GHz (GenuineIntel  =

2400MHz) (i686/4 cpu)
     on        linux - 2.6.22-smp [slackware]
     using     ccache gcc version 4.1.2
     smoketime 26 minutes 14 seconds (average 13 minutes 7 seconds)

...

    33662     Configuration (common) none
----------- ---------------------------------------------------------
O O - -     -Dcc=3D'ccache gcc'
O O - -     -Dcc=3D'ccache /tmp/GCC/D/bin/gcc'
| | | +----- PERLIO =3D perlio -DDEBUGGING
| | +------- PERLIO =3D stdio  -DDEBUGGING
| +--------- PERLIO =3D perlio
+----------- PERLIO =3D stdio


The output in mktest.out:

...
Configuration: -Dusedevel -Dcc=3D'ccache gcc'
------------------------------------------------------------------------=
------

Compiler info: ccache gcc version 4.1.2
...

Configuration: -Dusedevel -Dcc=3D'ccache /tmp/GCC/D/bin/gcc'
------------------------------------------------------------------------=
------

Compiler info: ccache /tmp/GCC/D/bin/gcc version 4.2.3
...


The header in mktest.rpt only lists 4.1.2 and not 4.2.3.

This brings me to my question:

What would the prefered solution be?
a) running multiple smokes - one for each versions of gcc?
b) A patch for the report builder to output each gcc versions? (which  =

would also mean patching the summary builder and so on)


(My current testing idea is to install each version of gcc and smoke it.=

When that is up and running I'm also thinking of installing the gcc  =

snapsnots and testing those (first the gcc test, then a perl smoke). The=
  =

downside of this last one is - of course - that some builds will fail du=
e  =

to unresolved/new bugs in gcc.)


Kind regards,

Bram