This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: [gold patch] Add tests for --detect-odr-violations with compressed debug sections
- From: Ian Lance Taylor <iant at google dot com>
- To: Cary Coutant <ccoutant at google dot com>
- Cc: Binutils <binutils at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2011 07:35:50 -0700
- Subject: Re: [gold patch] Add tests for --detect-odr-violations with compressed debug sections
- References: <BANLkTin-WcM2rufu9+HtVJKpJX25=2kFufP4xXNLRgXTbvi9Ow@mail.gmail.com>
Cary Coutant <email@example.com> writes:
> I'm not happy with this particular part of the patch to
> testsuite/Makefile.am, though:
> +gcctestdir/as: $(TEST_AS)
> + test -d gcctestdir || mkdir -p gcctestdir
> + rm -f gcctestdir/as
> + (cd gcctestdir && $(LN_S) ../../../gas/as-new as)
> I need to use the in-tree assembler to compile with
> -Wa,--compress-debug-sections, since I don't believe we can count on
> support for that assembler option in all configurations. What's the
> best way to refer to the assembler in this context? I could have used
> "../$(TEST_AS)", but that assumes that $(top_builddir) is always
> relative -- is it?
I think $(top_builddir) is always relative. More importantly,
$(abs_top_builddir) is always absolute. Use that.
> Also, I run the compressed debug tests only if HAVE_ZLIB is set, so in
> testsuite/debug_msg.sh, I test for the presence of
> debug_msg_cdebug.err. Would it be better to just factor those out into
> a separate test script?
I think it's OK.
> 2011-06-23 Cary Coutant <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> * testsuite/Makefile.am: Add in-tree assembler to gcctestdir.
> (debug_msg_cdebug.o, odr_violation1_cdebug.o, odr_violation2_cdebug.o)
> (debug_msg_cdebug.err): New targets.
> * testsuite/Makefile.in: Regenerate.
> * testsuite/debug_msg.sh: Check output of link with compressed debug.
> Fix checks for link with shared library.
This is OK per above.