Re: [Tinycc-devel] Ready for Release 0.9.27

[grischka]

Christian Jullien wrote:
> About test 42
>
> Comparing by hand the 42_function_pointer output and 42_function_pointer
> expect files I see no different

Are you sure? That could mean that there is a comatibility problem
with the bash shell or the make program on your ARM installs.

> Investigating further, I see in tests2/Makefile
>
> # And some tests don't test the right thing with -run
> NORUN =
> 42_function_pointer.test : NORUN = true
>
> If I comment this line, it makes happy the whole test suite on RPi.
>
> I've to idea why someone added this trick which is used there:

This test was present previously, but modified by Michael to test a
feature of the tcc linker specifically in executable file output mode.

That is the point of the "-NORUN trick".

However obviously the test works as it should on i386 and x86_64
(on windows too).

> %.test: %.c %.expect
>         @echo Test: $*...
> # test -run
>         @if test -z "$(NORUN)"; then \
>             $(TCC) -run $< $(ARGS) $(FILTER) >$*.output 2>&1 || true; \
>           else \
>             $(TCC) $< -o ./$*.exe $(FILTER) 2>&1 && \
>             ./$*.exe $(ARGS) >$*.output 2>&1 || true; \
>           fi
>         @diff -Nbu $(SRC)/$*.expect $*.output && rm -f $*.output $*.exe
>
> Any clue?

I've no clue either.

I would try to remove any @, 2>&1, $(FILTER), and rm ... and then run

    $ make -C tests/tests2 42_function_pointer.test

and see what happens...

--- grischka

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tinycc-devel [mailto:address@hidden
> On Behalf Of Christian Jullien
> Sent: samedi 11 février 2017 10:56
> To: address@hidden
> Subject: Re: [Tinycc-devel] Ready for Release 0.9.27
>
> Thanks for your fix, now the only remaining issue on RPi is:
>
> Test: 42_function_pointer...
> --- ../../tests/tests2/42_function_pointer.expect       2017-02-11
> 10:52:22.626094358 +0100
> +++ 42_function_pointer.output  1970-01-01 01:00:00.000000000 +0100
> @@ -1,2 +0,0 @@
> -yo 24
> -42
> Makefile:54: recipe for target '42_function_pointer.test' failed
>
> I'll try to investigate this one too...
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tinycc-devel [mailto:address@hidden
> On Behalf Of grischka
> Sent: samedi 11 février 2017 09:48
> To: address@hidden
> Subject: Re: [Tinycc-devel] Ready for Release 0.9.27
>
> Christian Jullien wrote:
> > Hi Grischka,
> >
> > The culprit commit is "2016-12-20 grischka tests: OOT build fixes etc."
> > Sorry Grischka :o)
> >
> > This is the first commit after which " Segmentation fault' appears.
> >
> > More specifically, the issue is with lib/Makefile, if I revert only 
> > this file, seg. Fault is gone.
> > Don't ask me why, but adding again:
> >
> > PICFLAGS = -fPIC
>
> Great, thanks.  I think it was just the former comment why -fPIC was needed
> ("for linking into shared libraries")  which was confusing.
> After all neither is tcc generating PIC code for shared libraries nor do we
> support building shared libraries on ARM at all.
>
> Anyway, I fixed it.
>
> Now, I suppose that all tests are OK.
>
> Except maybe "42_function_pointer" on ARM64 and possibly ARM?
>
> The question for still failing tests then would be:
>
> Did they work originally and were broken later (and if so by which commit)
> or did they never work on that platform.
>
> Thanks,
>
> --- grischka
>
>
> > ...
> >
> > XFLAGS = $(TGT) $(PICFLAGS)
> > ifeq "$(XCC)" "$(CC)"
> >  XFLAGS += $(CFLAGS)
> > endif
> >
> > Is enough.
> >
> > I'm not sure if PICFLAGS should be globally set or inside the ifeq
> section.
> > I let you deicde.
> >
> > Christian
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Tinycc-devel
> > [mailto:address@hidden
> > On Behalf Of grischka
> > Sent: vendredi 10 février 2017 09:11
> > To: address@hidden
> > Subject: Re: [Tinycc-devel] Ready for Release 0.9.27
> >
> > Christian Jullien wrote:
> > > Here is the complete log I get this morning with current mob and
> > especially ...
> > > make[1]: *** [abitest] Segmentation fault
> > > ------------ test3 ------------
> > > ../tcc -B.. -I../include -I.. -I..
> > -DCONFIG_TRIPLET="\"arm-linux-gnueabihf\"" ...
> > > Segmentation fault
> > I think we first need to find the cause of these crashes on ARM with -run.
> > Can you investigate that, eventually ?
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > -- grischka
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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