Re: Compiler for testing a bootstrapped glibc?

[Mike Frysinger <vapier at gentoo dot org>]

On Thu 27 Feb 2014 16:05:17 Carlos O'Donell wrote:
> On 02/27/2014 02:49 PM, Brooks Moses wrote:
> > I've run into a conundrum with testing our bootstrapped-from-scratch
> > glibc builds, and I'm curious how other people's processes work.
> > 
> > Recently, we updated to a version of glibc that can do a single-step
> > bootstrap -- and so we now build a static-only GCC with no glibc, and
> > then build glibc using that GCC.  This works great -- but then we want
> > to run "make check".  And, unfortunately, glibc's testsuite requires
> > more than just a static-only GCC.
> > 
> > There are a couple of solution directions that I've thought of:
> > 
> > 1) Build a dynamic GCC using the just-built glibc, and install it on
> > top of the static-only GCC we used for building.  This is arguably
> > simpler, but means rebuilding anything in glibc after testing will get
> > different results than before testing.  It also increases the overall
> > build-and-test time.
> > 
> > 2) Test the glibc with a different (pre-existing) compiler instead of
> > with the compiler we used to build it.  This is what I'd prefer, but I
> > couldn't figure out how to do that without doing evil sed things to
> > the generated makefile fragments.
> > 
> > Is there a good way to test against a different compiler than the
> > build compiler?  Or is there a good alternative here that I'm missing?
> > 
> >  How do other people handle this?
> 
> My opinion is that everyone does #1.

it's how i've always done things (and thus how Gentoo does it)

it's also how every other cross-compiler build script i've seen does it
-mike

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.