tinycc-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Tinycc-devel] plans to 0.9.28

From: avih
Subject: Re: [Tinycc-devel] plans to 0.9.28
Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2017 16:05:01 +0000 (UTC)
Two things:

1. Will the version be 0.9.27 or 0.9.28? The file VERSION has been 0.9.27 for some time now, and I think some packagers already package it as 0.9.27+N . 0.9.27 was not officially released as far as I know, but I still think it should be skipped, and so the release should be 0.9.28 .

2. On windows in msys2 mingw 64 environment with gcc 7.2.0, (building tcc 64 for windows with mingw gcc 64) the build completes but some tests fail (see below).

With mingw 32 environment (of msys2 - building tcc 32 with mingw gcc 32) all the tests pass (when adding --cpu=i386, because it's not detected). Building tcc 64 with a recent build of tcc 64 itself (self hosting), or tcc 32 with a recent build of tcc 32 - all the tests pass too. I didn't try building tcc with the msys2 native (cygwin like) gcc.

So the only failure I'm familiar with is tcc 64 with mingw 64:

Here's the invocation and failure (where it passes when CC is mingw 32 gcc or tcc 32 or tcc 64):

mkdir build && cd build && ../configure && make && make test
...
C compiler          gcc (7.2)
Target OS           MINGW64_NT-6.3
CPU                 x86_64
Config              WIN32
...
------------ libtest ------------
./libtcc_test.exe -B../../win32 -I../../include -I../.. -I.. -L..
Hello World!
fib(32) = 2178309
add(32, 64) = 96
gcc -o tcctest.gcc ../../tests/tcctest.c -DTCC_TARGET_X86_64 -DTCC_TARGET_PE -fno-strict-aliasing -I.. -I../.. -static -w -O0 -std=gnu99 -fno-omit-frame-pointer
./tcctest.gcc > test.ref
------------ test3 ------------
../tcc.exe -B../../win32 -I../../include -I../.. -I.. -L.. -DTCC_TARGET_X86_64 -DTCC_TARGET_PE -run ../../tcc.c -B../../win32 -I../../include -I../.. -I.. -L.. -DTCC_TARGET_X86_64 -DTCC_TARGET_PE -run ../../tcc.c -B../../win32 -I../../include -I../.. -I.. -L.. -DTCC_TARGET_X86_64 -DTCC_TARGET_PE -run ../../tcc.c -B../../win32 -I../../include -I../.. -I.. -L.. -run ../../tests/tcctest.c > test.out3
/bin/sh: line 1:  4448 Segmentation fault      ../tcc.exe -B../../win32 -I../../include -I../.. -I.. -L.. -DTCC_TARGET_X86_64 -DTCC_TARGET_PE -run ../../tcc.c -B../../win32 -I../../include -I../.. -I.. -L.. -DTCC_TARGET_X86_64 -DTCC_TARGET_PE -run ../../tcc.c -B../../win32 -I../../include -I../.. -I.. -L.. -DTCC_TARGET_X86_64 -DTCC_TARGET_PE -run ../../tcc.c -B../../win32 -I../../include -I../.. -I.. -L.. -run ../../tests/tcctest.c > test.out3
make[1]: *** [Makefile:103: test3] Error 139
make[1]: Leaving directory '/e/dev/tcc/src/tcc.refactor-upstream.git/build/tests'
make: *** [Makefile:351: test] Error 2


The exact same procedure with gcc 32 passes all tests.



On Sunday, September 24, 2017 8:55 PM, Christian Jullien <address@hidden> wrote:


While mod after you last commit works great on
Windows 32/64
Rpi arm

It has one issue on Aarch64 (yet I don't know if it is related to your last
commit or not):

address@hidden:~/tinycc$ uname -a
Linux gcc113 3.13.0-92-generic #139-Ubuntu SMP Tue Jun 28 20:45:34 UTC 2016
aarch64 aarch64 aarch64 GNU/Linux

Test: 95_bitfields...
--- 95_bitfields.expect 2017-09-24 10:50:04.240209938 -0700
+++ 95_bitfields.output 2017-09-24 10:50:43.236414994 -0700
@@ -31,7 +31,7 @@
---- TEST 6 ----
bits in use : 0000007000FFFFFFFFFFFFFF
bits as set : 00000030002001FD00000004
-values      : 01 02 03 04 fffffffd
+values      : 01 02 03 04 fd
align/size  : 4 12


@@ -69,7 +69,7 @@
---- TEST 6 - PACKED ----
bits in use : 007000FFFFFFFFFFFFFF
bits as set : 0030002001FD00000004
-values      : 01 02 03 04 fffffffd
+values      : 01 02 03 04 fd
align/size  : 1 10


@@ -107,7 +107,7 @@
---- TEST 6 - WITH ALIGN ----
bits in use : 0000007000FFFFFFFFFFFFFF
bits as set : 00000030002001FD00000004
-values      : 01 02 03 04 fffffffd
+values      : 01 02 03 04 fd
align/size  : 4 12


@@ -145,5 +145,5 @@
---- TEST 6 - PACKED - WITH ALIGN ----
bits in use : 007000FFFFFFFFFFFFFF
bits as set : 0030002001FD00000004
-values      : 01 02 03 04 fffffffd
+values      : 01 02 03 04 fd
align/size  : 1 10
make[2]: *** [95_bitfields.test] Error 1
Test: 95_bitfields_ms...
--- 95_bitfields_ms.expect      2017-09-24 10:50:04.240209938 -0700
+++ 95_bitfields_ms.output      2017-09-24 10:50:43.246414020 -0700
@@ -31,7 +31,7 @@
---- TEST 6 - MS-BITFIELDS ----
bits in use : 00000000000000700000FFFF000000FFFFFFFFFF
bits as set : 000000000000003000002001000000FD00000004
-values      : 01 02 03 04 fffffffd
+values      : 01 02 03 04 fd
align/size  : 4 20


@@ -69,7 +69,7 @@
---- TEST 6 - MS-BITFIELDS - PACKED ----
bits in use : 00000000700000FFFFFFFFFFFFFF
bits as set : 000000003000002001FD00000004
-values      : 01 02 03 04 fffffffd
+values      : 01 02 03 04 fd
align/size  : 1 14


@@ -107,7 +107,7 @@
---- TEST 6 - MS-BITFIELDS - WITH ALIGN ----
bits in use : 00000000000000700000FFFF000000FFFFFFFFFF
bits as set : 000000000000003000002001000000FD00000004
-values      : 01 02 03 04 fffffffd
+values      : 01 02 03 04 fd
align/size  : 4 20


@@ -145,5 +145,5 @@
---- TEST 6 - MS-BITFIELDS - PACKED - WITH ALIGN ----
bits in use : 00000000700000FFFFFFFFFFFFFF
bits as set : 000000003000002001FD00000004
-values      : 01 02 03 04 fffffffd
+values      : 01 02 03 04 fd
align/size  : 1 14
make[2]: *** [95_bitfields_ms.test] Error 1

-----Original Message-----
From: Tinycc-devel [mailto:tinycc-devel-bounces+eligis=address@hidden]
On Behalf Of Christian Jullien
Sent: dimanche 24 septembre 2017 19:40
To: 'grischka'; address@hidden
Subject: Re: [Tinycc-devel] plans to 0.9.28

Very nice indeed.

I offer you my time to test every attempts on:

Windows x86/x64
Linux x86/x64
RPi arm
Aarch64


-----Original Message-----
From: grischka [mailto:address@hidden]
Sent: dimanche 24 septembre 2017 19:10
To: Christian JULLIEN; address@hidden
Subject: Re: [Tinycc-devel] plans to 0.9.28

Hi,

I just pushed a patch for more complete 'long' support (which was started by
Matthias Gatto for _Generic), as well as with eome improvements for
multicharacter constants:

http://repo.or.cz/tinycc.git/commitdiff/1443039416dd02750765efde1af35e31c8d4
1be3

So, now, basically, I'd agree to, including the offer to undertake the
necessary steps, to release this, say after some weeks of for finel testing,
as
                        ___ 0.9.27 ___.

What do people think?

-- gr

Christian JULLIEN wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
>
> Last December, we where close to release 0.9.28 but more than 6 months
> later, I see no plans for an imminent 0.9.28 release.
>
> I'm fortunate to know how to build tcc on the many machines I use but
> also see many users trying to use a very old 0.9.27 version.
>
> I think it's time to release 0.9.28 and start new dev. on 0.9.29 IMHO,
>
> - we should decide what we really want to implement before we release
> 0.9.28 and propose an ETA for implementation
>
> - enter a bug fix, validation cycle (no new feature or gratuitous
> changes)
>
> - check all ports (Windows 32/64, Linux x86, x64, arm, Aarch64,
> more?), I will test all of them
>
> - Make 0.9.28
>
>
> Sounds reasonable to you?
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> --
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tinycc-devel mailing list
> address@hidden
> https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/tinycc-devel




_______________________________________________
Tinycc-devel mailing list
address@hidden
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/tinycc-devel


_______________________________________________
Tinycc-devel mailing list
address@hidden
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/tinycc-devel


reply via email to
[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]