Re: [RFA: and RFC:] run_dump_test in ld: extensions and globality of testsuite functions.

[Nick Clifton <nickc at cambridge dot redhat dot com>]

Hi Hans-Peter,

> > Hmm, what if the target/remote OS does not support symlinks ?
> 
> That's another issue.  I guess you can't run parts of the ld
> testsuite then.

Well Ok, if the dependency was already there.

> > Couldn't "-B../" be used instead ?
> 
> No, it's for finding gas, and it wouldn't find ld-new anyway,
> when looking for ld.  Perhaps I should expand on the "gcc
> -B-reason".  I'm lazy, so I'll just copy what I found in
> ld/testsuite/config/default.exp hoping it will clarify:
> ----
> # Make a symlink from tmpdir/as to the assembler in the build tree, so
> # that we can use a -B option to gcc to force it to use the newly
> # built assembler.
> if {![file isdirectory tmpdir/gas]} then {
>     catch "exec mkdir tmpdir/gas" status
>     catch "exec ln -s ../../../gas/as-new tmpdir/gas/as" status
> }
> set gcc_gas_flag "-B[pwd]/tmpdir/gas/"

Well that's is easy enough to fix.

Finding ld-new should not be a problem since the code in default.exp
is based off of @base_dir.  A few tweaks here and there and it should
all work again.

> > I like the idea of commoning up these functions.  How about
> > dejagnu/lib as the repository though ?
> 
> We'd need to include the dejagnu directory in binutils then,
> or at least dejagnu/lib.  Putting it in libiberty seems better,

Fair enough.  I was just not sure if there was a precedent for putting
expect scripts into libiberty.


Hey DJ - any reason why libiberty would not want to have expect
scripts in a subdirectory ??


Cheers
        Nick