Re: [Gnu-arch-users] GCC v. Arch address@hidden: Regressions on mainline]

[Charles Duffy]

On Wed, 2004-06-23 at 11:15, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 23, 2004 at 12:10:28PM -0400, Colin Walters wrote:
> > You could also imagine a separate category for the test suite, which
> > developers could also commit to.
> 
> ...yes, that emphasises the problem.
> 
> The *result* of 'make check' is not static at all. Consider the case
> where a new test has just been added, which (a) fails, and (b) is a
> regression from the previous release.

Simple solution, though it uses some upcoming functionality:

Require the change to the test suite, if it fails with the head of the
development line, to either (1) have a flag that says "permit-failures",
or (2) be checked in atomically [this is where the upcoming-features bit
comes in] with a fix to the head of the development line.


I'm quite (over?)confident that this is a solvable problem, as long as
the corner cases get addressed.