From: Jeff Garland (jeff_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-05-09 15:17:25
Doug Gregor wrote:
> On May 9, 2007, at 2:50 PM, Jeff Garland wrote:
>> Having one tree per compiler will seriously break the regression
>> test system,
>> not to mention making it more resource intense for those that build/
>> several compilers on a machine. Not saying it can't be layered on,
>> but I
>> don't think having 3 trees to run 3 compilers is a good solution.
> What's wrong with having 3 *build* trees? We already do that with the
> regression test system, except that we call them bin.v2/compiler-1,
> bin.v2/compiler-2, and bin.v2/compiler-3 rather than compiler-1,
> compiler-2, and compiler-3.
> We'll still only have one source tree.
Oh, that's fine - no problem with that. I mistook the comment to mean you'd
need 3 source trees.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk