Re: Have we become too Intel x64 centered?

From: Ville Voutilainen (ville.voutilainen_at_[hidden])
Date: 2021-01-24 10:21:42

On Sat, 23 Jan 2021 at 17:58, Tom Kent via Boost <boost_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>
> On Sat, Jan 23, 2021 at 7:10 AM Marc Glisse via Boost <boost_at_[hidden]>
> wrote:
>
> > On Sat, 23 Jan 2021, John Maddock via Boost wrote:
> >
> > > I have no solution for this, but I note that neither do we have CI, nor
> > > tests on
> > > https://www.boost.org/development/tests/develop/developer/summary.html
> > > that aren't Intel x86.  The compiler list has shrunk to msvc/clang/gcc
> > > as well.
> >
> > https://www.boost.org/development/testing.html does not link to
> > explanations on how to add testers, not very encouraging. The bottom still
> > says literally "Revised $Date$" so maybe that page is dead.
> >
> > Why not use the gcc testfarm? Despite the name, it isn't at all restricted
> > to gcc. It has some aarch64, sparc64, ppc64, etc. Of course you shouldn't
> > abuse it by running a CI on every commit, but running the testsuite once a
> > week on aarch64 should be no problem I believe. An advantage is that
> > developers would have access to the platform, so they would have an easier
> > time reproducing issues than with other testers.
> >
> >
> Interesting, the GCC Compile Farm (https://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/CompileFarm)
> looks like it has quite a few architectures. I applied for an account
> there. I think it would be pretty easy to get some boost test jobs running
> weekly-ish across different architectures.
>
> I know it is hosted by the GCC people, but do they have qualms about
> running our tests against clang too? I can ask on that list, just wondering
> if you have any knowledge.

I'm not speaking for GCC as a project, but no such qualms for me. Be
civil, don't hoard the machines,
nice your stuff out of the way if you can. The farm is predominantly
for GCC/libstdc++, be a civilized
house-guest if you use the farm. ;)