This is the mail archive of the libc-alpha@sourceware.org mailing list for the glibc project.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
Other format: | [Raw text] |
On Monday 06 January 2014 10:38:46 Joseph S. Myers wrote: > On Mon, 6 Jan 2014, Andreas Schwab wrote: > > "Joseph S. Myers" <joseph@codesourcery.com> writes: > > > Note that the checked-in file should be truncated before running "make > > > regen-ulps", so as to remove old ulps for tests for which errors have > > > gone down or whose names have changed. > > > > Shouldn't regen-ulps run the tests with --ignore-max-ulp=yes? > > That would only work if the ulps were independent of the compiler and > hardware in use. For x86 and x86_64, for example, regeneration for a > release involves one from-scratch regeneration after truncation, then > subsequent incremental use of regen-ulps by people who see ulps because of > different compilers or hardware in use (and similarly, outside of the > freeze, from-scratch x86 / x86_64 regenerations would unnecessarily > introduce ulps failures for people with hardware different from that used > for the last regeneration). i've updated the wiki page: https://sourceware.org/glibc/wiki/Regeneration (go to the bottom to the Math section) can you guys give it a look to make sure i didn't screw up horribly ? -mike
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |