similar to: [LLVMdev] Validation Criteria

Tanya Lattner wrote: > I've finished adding the -rundejagnu option to the nightly tester script, > which was the last step to fully support Dejagnu. I think now is the > appropriate time to discuss keeping QMTest or switching to Dejagnu. A lot > of work went into using QMTest, so I think we should make this decision > carefully and before the 1.4 release. > > Here are the

I've finished adding the -rundejagnu option to the nightly tester script, which was the last step to fully support Dejagnu. I think now is the appropriate time to discuss keeping QMTest or switching to Dejagnu. A lot of work went into using QMTest, so I think we should make this decision carefully and before the 1.4 release. Here are the pros and cons in my eyes, please feel free to add your

On Thursday 29 January 2009 03:18, Bill Wendling wrote: > On Jan 28, 2009, at 8:25 PM, Tanya Lattner wrote: > > On Jan 28, 2009, at 3:46 PM, David Greene wrote: > >> On Wednesday 28 January 2009 15:59, Tanya Lattner wrote: > >>> On Jan 28, 2009, at 12:18 PM, David Greene wrote: > >>>> I have a buildbot operating to do validating builds of llvm up at

On Jan 28, 2009, at 8:25 PM, Tanya Lattner wrote: > On Jan 28, 2009, at 3:46 PM, David Greene wrote: > >> On Wednesday 28 January 2009 15:59, Tanya Lattner wrote: >>> On Jan 28, 2009, at 12:18 PM, David Greene wrote: >>>> I have a buildbot operating to do validating builds of llvm up at >>>> >>>> http://obbligato.org:8080 >>>>

Hello, I'd like to clarify a few points on how the release process works. Each release must satisfy the following criteria for each supported target: * LLVM-GCC & LLVM must build in both release and debug mode. They must also build srcDir != objDir. LLVM-GCC must build with support for c, c++, fortran, and obj-c/obj-c++ (Mac only). * LLVM-GCC must bootstrap. * "make check"

I noticed that llvm 2.2 is slated for release on Feb. 4th of 2008. Do the llvm 2.2 releases mimic those of FSF gcc by requiring no major regressions for the release? For example, would Bug 1462 (CodeGen doesn't fully support i128) likely be fixed for 2.2 (even though it as marked as priority 2)? Also, how are the merges with the Apple GCC 4.2 branch handled? Are those done at some regular

I found that it was runtest.exp which referenced to the internal exp_debug function. For testing purposes I disabled the reference and ran a new: make check VERBOSE=1 which gave me this: ------------------ if test -d "/C/projects/build/MinGW/llvm-2-1/test" ; then \ if test -f "/C/projects/build/MinGW/llvm-2-1/test/Makefile" ; then \ echo llvm[0]: Running test suite ; \

On Sun, 9 Jan 2005, Henrik Bach wrote: > I found that it was runtest.exp which referenced to the internal exp_debug > function. For testing purposes I disabled the reference and ran a new: Hi Henrik, Unfortunately, none of us has access to a MinGW setup, so we cannot debug this problem. If you're hacking on dejagnu or expect itself (because it has not yet been ported to MinGW

> Well, doing a runtest in the test folder gave me these results: > ----------------- > WARNING: Couldn't find the global config file. WARNING: No tool specified > Test Run By llvm on Fri Jan 7 20:55:24 2005 > Native configuration is i686-pc-mingw32 > > === tests === > > ERROR: (DejaGnu) proc "exp_debug" does not exist. The error code is NONE The >

Can any one, who has dejagnu and expect installed and working, send me an output when running '(g)make check' from llvm. Thanks. Henrik. ============================================================= Henrik Bach LLVM Open Source Developer e-mail: henrik_bach_llvm at hotmail.com ============================================================= 'Nothing is impossible; The impossible

Well, doing a runtest in the test folder gave me these results: ----------------- WARNING: Couldn't find the global config file. WARNING: No tool specified Test Run By llvm on Fri Jan 7 20:55:24 2005 Native configuration is i686-pc-mingw32 === tests === ERROR: (DejaGnu) proc "exp_debug" does not exist. The error code is NONE The info on the error is: can't rename to

>> 1) Parallel "make check". >> Modelled after the successful clang "make test -jX" experiment, I am >> now bold enough to sink my teeth into the LLVM test suite. >> I have a prototype implementation, along the same lines, ready. > >Can you please explain this in detail. > >Thanks, >Tanya Sure. This is how "make test

In which folder does proc "exp_debug" exist, because I've downloaded (not build and installed this version) the latest version of expect (5.42), but cannot find it? Henrik. ----Original Message Follows---- From: Tanya Lattner <tonic at nondot.org> Reply-To: LLVM Developers Mailing List <llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu> To: LLVM Developers Mailing List <llvmdev at

> In which folder does proc "exp_debug" exist, because I've downloaded (not > build and installed this version) the latest version of expect (5.42), but > cannot find it? I have no clue. Just install it. -Tanya > > Henrik. > > > ----Original Message Follows---- > From: Tanya Lattner <tonic at nondot.org> > Reply-To: LLVM Developers Mailing

On Jan 28, 2009, at 3:46 PM, David Greene wrote: > On Wednesday 28 January 2009 15:59, Tanya Lattner wrote: >> On Jan 28, 2009, at 12:18 PM, David Greene wrote: >>> I have a buildbot operating to do validating builds of llvm up at >>> >>> http://obbligato.org:8080 >>> >>> My DSL has been stable enough for the past few months for me to

> I'm not sure if dejagnu is installed correctly. Is there any way to call it > on the command line? > > I get this: > ------------------- > $ runtest --version | tee -a my_runtest.log > WARNING: Couldn't find the global config file. > Expect version is 5.21 > Tcl version is 8.0 > Framework version is 1.4.4 > ------------------- It looks

On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 11:45 PM, Tanya Lattner <tonic at nondot.org> wrote: > LLVMers, > > The 2.5 pre-release2 is finally available for testing: > http://llvm.org/prereleases/2.5/ > > If you have time, I'd appreciate anyone who can help test the release. > Please do the following: > > 1) Download/compile llvm source, and either compile llvm-gcc source or use

On Sunday 28 November 2004 00:24, Tanya Lattner wrote: Just some comments from a QMTest user... Note however, that even with them, dejagnu looks better. > Cons of QMTest: > 1) You have to use the gui to add directories. I think you're wrong. Manually creating a directory would work, as QMTest does not place anything special in directories. > 2) You have to use the gui to XFAIL

I'm not sure if dejagnu is installed correctly. Is there any way to call it on the command line? I get this: ------------------- $ runtest --version | tee -a my_runtest.log WARNING: Couldn't find the global config file. Expect version is 5.21 Tcl version is 8.0 Framework version is 1.4.4 ------------------- and ------------------- $ ls /usr/local/share/dejagnu/

> > Cons of QMTest: > > 1) You have to use the gui to add directories. > > I think you're wrong. Manually creating a directory would work, as QMTest does > not place anything special in directories. I may have worded this poorly, but I think you have to use the gui to add new directories or tests, or specific tests. Otherwise, it does not know what to do with those