incubator-stdcxx-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Martin Sebor <se...@roguewave.com>
Subject Re: many builds in DATA status
Date Thu, 02 Aug 2007 22:09:53 GMT
Andrew Black wrote:
> Greetings Martin
> 
> I observed the Windows issues earlier today when I glanced at the
> results, but I didn't spot the Solaris failures when I was making that
> pass.  The reason for the GCC builds on windows are processed correctly
> is because they use the UNIX infrastructure, rather than the Windows
> infrastructure.
> 
> The cause of the failure on Solaris appears to be a lack of
> functionality in the /usr/bin/awk, specifically the lack of a toupper()
> builtin.  Our options on this platform appear to be a choice between
> using /usr/bin/nawk (aka /usr/xpg4/bin/awk),

The latter is the POSIX awk. That's the one we need if we're using
POSIX features that aren't available in the Solaris implementation
of awk. I suggest you do that as a quick stopgap solution until we
settle on the final format of exec output.

> and rewriting the parser to
>  avoid the use of the toupper() (and tolower()) builtins.  A third
> option I see (altering the exec utility) I'll go into more detail
> elsewhere (specifically in the bulletproofing thread).

I think we will do that regardless. Relying on strings in all caps
seems too fragile. I agree that the bulletproofing thread is the
right place to discuss these details.

> 
> I'm less certain about the cause of the failure on windows, but I
> suspect it to be basically the same as the cause of failure on Solaris -
> that of the start/stop parsing tags not being picked up.

We need to do the same thing there.

Martin

> 
> --Andrew Black
> 
> Martin Sebor wrote:
>> There are large number of builds in DATA status in recent build
>> results: essentially, all Solaris and Windows builds (with gcc
>> on Windows being the notable exception). I suspect they might
>> have been caused by our recent changes to the run/publish script.
>>
>> Andrew, can you please confirm and if so look into it ASAP?
>>
>> Thanks
>> Martin


Mime
View raw message