Re: Recent simulator patches broke many sims

[Hans-Peter Nilsson <hans-peter dot nilsson at axis dot com>]

> From: Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org>
> Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2013 19:15:17 +0100

> On Tuesday 26 March 2013 13:12:38 Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:
> i see it the other way.  doing `make check` for all these
> packages work w/out the user having to dig into esoteric tools
> (that often times lack documentation, or any real semblance of
> an entry point).
> 
> for binutils/gcc/etc..., there are plenty of
> compile/link/etc... tests that can be done without needing to
> know about a board.  the sim is special in that testing it
> requires running code,

Thinking you're good without running any runnnable tests?
I guess we have to agree to disagree here.

> so it's entirely reasonable for the
> default `make check` to setup a state where the tests actually
> work.

You know, if someone went to do the work to provide a default
(overridable) target-board for all cross *-elf et al targets at
the toplevel, I wouldn't mind.

I'll just add that you're wrong if you think gcc testing without
*running* the runnable tests is to be taken seriously (with very
few exceptions).  I haven't ran gdb tests recently enough to
remember it, but...

brgds, H-P