From: Alex P. <pes...@ma...> - 2013-11-29 07:16:50
|
On 11/28/13 22:52, Dmitrijs Ledkovs wrote: > On 28 November 2013 18:26, Leyne, Sean <Se...@br...> wrote: >> Dmitrijs, >> >>> I've enabled ARM64 build of firebird2.5 in ubuntu. >>> I don't have access to arm64 machines and hence i have no idea if it actually >>> runs =) it does compile though. >> While it is good that you worked on the port. >> >> If you don't have an platform to test, why would you bother with the effort? >> > The reason it's not tested, it's because I've never used firebird =) > > Hence the instructions on how to use chroot with qemu-static based > emulation to test firebird on, if one wishes to try out ARM64. > Furthermore since binaries are compiled, one can boot into foundation > model (free of charge to download) and test it there as well. > > Are there any sort of testsuites for firebird that I can execute? It > doesn't look like any are compiled or run at Debian/Ubuntu package > build time. We have 2 testsuites - official: http://sourceforge.net/p/firebird/code/HEAD/tree/qa/, svn checkout svn://svn.code.sf.net/p/firebird/code/qa/ and historical: http://firebird.cvs.sourceforge.net/viewvc/firebird/fbtcs/?pathrev=B2_5_Release (be aware 8 tests in the end fail) I've used to work with both of them on Ubuntu 12.04. QA requires python and kinterbasdb installed, fbtcs requires nothing in addition to tools one is using to build firebird. > > E.g. postgresql package executes hundreds of test cases at build-time, > to verify that what has been compiled actually works. Not sure how are ubuntu packages are built, but suppose it's possible to run QA after the build. There are also >900 tests. >> Further, if you can't test, wouldn't it be ill-advised/dangerous to take the patch (which usually implies/requires that the change has been tested)? >> > Please look at my patch. It doesn't actually add or modify any code. > All it does is add boiler plate defines. It is equivalent of > "autoreconf -f -i", which all what's needed for majority of portable > software packages out there. Why is autoconf not used? (one doesn't > need to use automake, one can use autoconf stand-alone to do > target/feature discover - e.g. endianess, required libraries to link, > etc) > > > Are you saying Firebird is currently broken on all little-endian linux targets? As far as I know it's OK. But there are may be issues on specific platform. For example to build for Android (on ARM) we had to turn off optimization - or even client hangs/segfaults very soon. > Not sure how can it be dangerous, the patch doesn't modify anything on > any other target / architecture. And since Firebird doesn't exist on > ARM64 yet, it can't possibly regress =) If build completes that's already a kind of minimum test cause newly built embedded engine is used during the build. Therefore I think we can accept the patch provided it's done not for 2.5 only but also for trunk. |