This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Testing GCC on Cygwin made substantially easier [was Re: dragonegg in FSF gcc?]
- From: Laurynas Biveinis <laurynas dot biveinis at gmail dot com>
- To: Dave Korn <dave dot korn dot cygwin at googlemail dot com>
- Cc: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: 2010年5月26日 10:04:18 +0200
- Subject: Re: Testing GCC on Cygwin made substantially easier [was Re: dragonegg in FSF gcc?]
- References: <20100409163655.GA25781@bromo.med.uc.edu> <4BBF5B7C.7060801@starynkevitch.net> <4BC07718.3060400@free.fr> <w2l571f6b511004110419z86479234oa1ac7afae0fc67f7@mail.gmail.com> <20100411141702.GA8481@bromo.med.uc.edu> <j2i6c33472e1004110823sf4a81eccs9f189e3cc46412b0@mail.gmail.com> <4BC1FDE3.6010309@gmail.com> <4BC4A28F.9000203@gnu.org> <4BC4E09F.7080605@gmail.com>
2010年4月13日 Dave Korn <dave.korn.cygwin@googlemail.com>:
> ÂUntil I find time to do a more major rewrite, anyone who wants to do testing
> on Cygwin could do worse than apply the sticking-plaster patch that I posted at:
>
> Âhttp://www.mail-archive.com/cygwin-patches@cygwin.com/msg04677.html
>
> and build themselves a locally modified version of the Cygwin DLL that will
> happily run make check at significant -j levels (I think I tried 12 at most;
> I've only got a dual-core cpu so it wasn't exactly efficient, but it proved
> that the patch holds up under substantial load).
I do not test on Cygwin these days, but previously I did and I wish I
knew this back then. I have added a note to
http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/Testing_GCC . Thanks for the info!
--
Laurynas