[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: regtests for previous stables failing
From: |
David Kastrup |
Subject: |
Re: regtests for previous stables failing |
Date: |
Fri, 27 Oct 2017 23:13:29 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.0.50 (gnu/linux) |
Thomas Morley <address@hidden> writes:
> But in the light of David's last mail I revived my old LilyDev3 which has:
> $ make --version && gcc --version
> GNU Make 3.81
> Copyright (C) 2006 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
> This is free software; see the source for copying conditions.
> There is NO warranty; not even for MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A
> PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
>
> This program built for i486-pc-linux-gnu
> gcc (Debian 4.7.2-5) 4.7.2
> Copyright (C) 2012 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
> This is free software; see the source for copying conditions. There is NO
> warranty; not even for MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
>
> All worked there.
>
> Obviously David was right about the make-version. Do we need to fix
> something? At least with more current code all is working as well.
>
> The results of the exercise at
> https://sourceforge.net/p/testlilyissues/issues/5217/#ae0c/7c60/8bbe
> ff
It's a bit tricky. Maybe we should cherry-pick the necessary
compatibility patches to the stable branches' tips? If you want to
bisect, you'd need to skim them in as well, I guess.
--
David Kastrup
- regtests for previous stables failing, Thomas Morley, 2017/10/26
- Re: regtests for previous stables failing, David Kastrup, 2017/10/26
- Re: regtests for previous stables failing, Thomas Morley, 2017/10/26
- Re: regtests for previous stables failing, David Kastrup, 2017/10/27
- Re: regtests for previous stables failing, Thomas Morley, 2017/10/27
- Re: regtests for previous stables failing, David Kastrup, 2017/10/27
- Re: regtests for previous stables failing, Thomas Morley, 2017/10/27
- Re: regtests for previous stables failing, David Kastrup, 2017/10/27
- Re: regtests for previous stables failing, James Lowe, 2017/10/27
- Re: regtests for previous stables failing, Thomas Morley, 2017/10/27
- Re: regtests for previous stables failing,
David Kastrup <=
- Re: regtests for previous stables failing, Thomas Morley, 2017/10/28
- Re: regtests for previous stables failing, David Kastrup, 2017/10/28
- Re: regtests for previous stables failing, Thomas Morley, 2017/10/28
- Re: regtests for previous stables failing, David Kastrup, 2017/10/28
- Re: regtests for previous stables failing, Thomas Morley, 2017/10/28
- Re: regtests for previous stables failing, Werner LEMBERG, 2017/10/29
- Re: regtests for previous stables failing, Thomas Morley, 2017/10/30
- Re: regtests for previous stables failing, Werner LEMBERG, 2017/10/27