Set-up Buildbot for GDC

[David J Kordsmeier]

On Friday, 8 December 2017 at 07:56:04 UTC, Johannes Pfau wrote:
> Am Thu, 07 Dec 2017 21:30:04 +0000
> schrieb David J Kordsmeier <dkords at gmail.com>:
>
>> On Friday, 7 July 2017 at 00:05:16 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
>> > On 7 July 2017 at 01:37, Johannes Pfau via D.gnu 
>> > <d.gnu at puremagic.com> wrote:
>> >> [...]
>> >
>> > Yeah, however 90% of that is unused by us.  I've added a 
>> > BUILD_CONFIGURE_FLAGS var to the buildci.sh script.
>> >
>> > https://github.com/D-Programming-GDC/buildbot-gdc/commit/47f8c7267682f19b3e1ce2afa49034217413451a#diff-711e8a244e68a7a465f29a18e33a22c3R34
>> >
>> > Can add a case for armhf and set --with-fpu= later and see 
>> > if that gets us further.
>> >
>> > Iain.
>> 
>> Folks, I am eagerly following the work on GDC related to 
>> AARCH64/linux.  I am attempting to duplicate results I see 
>> here: https://buildbot.dgnu.org/#/builders/2/builds/51
>> 
>> build 51 looks as if it succeeds.  In following the configure 
>> logs for build 51, I see a buildci.sh script gets run.  I 
>> would love to know what gcc configure command gets run.  Are 
>> the build artifacts available for download?  In particular, 
>> the config.log would be helpful. In my own previous attempts 
>> to build on AARCH64, I hit "not implemented" build error in 
>> math.d on the ieeeFlags, and would also probably hit 
>> "unsupported platform". It seems that my platform doesn't 
>> resolve that it is "arm".  And so I understand how the gdc 
>> development process works, will platform support fixes get 
>> back ported into older branches of GDC?  Your build is on 
>> master, but my question is, are AARCH64 support patches 
>> backported into the gdc-7 or gdc-6?  It seems like yes, but I 
>> haven't gone through the branches in detail yet. Thank you for 
>> the ARM support!
>
> Sorry to disappoint you, but I think buildbot does not build 
> phobos on AARCH64 yet. Also if you look at the testsuite 
> reports, although buildbots says the testsuite passes, there 
> are still 2417 unresolved testcases and 60 unsupported tests. 
> Most of these are likely missing AARCH64 assembler code.
>
> Maybe I can work on AARCH support for one or two days in the 
> christmas holidays. There's probably not much missing.
>
> And yes, currently we backport all fixes from master, including 
> phobos changes.
>
> -- Johannes

Well that explains everything.  Yes, it was clear this is a cross 
compiler.  I am trying to understand what is left here.  
Disappointment is relative, after all, this is 2017.  Nothing can 
be more disappointing than 2017.  AARCH64 is not a major platform 
and probably isn't worth exploring further until it is proven 
this platform is here to stay.  Maybe when iPhones start using 
AARCH64...Most people only use PC desktop computers.

Seriously man, where do I need to send funds to make sure this 
gets done?  It's been a solid year that this hasn't been resolved 
for GDC, and we've had AARCH64 platforms in volume since 2016.  
Rust and Go have resolved their AARCH64 issues with on target 
compilers as well as runtime support in this past year.  I 
recognize the switch to AARCH64 has been difficult for literally 
every open source project.  If financial incentives can help GDC 
let me know.  I would like to make this a very Merry Christmas 
for all of us in AARCH64-landia.