RTEMS Source Builder | main update to gcc-15 (#116)

[Joel Sherrill (@joel)]

Joel Sherrill commented: https://gitlab.rtems.org/rtems/tools/rtems-source-builder/-/issues/116#note_127530


This is in regards to what I am doing with the "next" tool chain.

> 1. All tier 1 and 2 are build

I am building all BSPs with all tests as part of making sure the tool chain is OK.

> 2. No test regressions for ARM, AARCH64, i386, PowerPC and SPARC

I haven't run tests for all but I plan to move from building all BSPs w/tests to doing a "cron sweep" before the tool configuration is trusted to move from "next" to "7".

I also plan on setting up "next" on the OAR build sweep setup once it is ready

> 3. LibBSD 14 and `main` (15). Tests for ARM (qemu)

@opticron has been making sure libbsd builds and has fewer/no warnings on GCC 15. He should comment on testing.

> 1. Deployment for `amd/amd-kra-k26`, `amd/amd-microzed`, `gemini/gemini-powerpc-net-legacy-bsps`, `gemini/gemini-powerpc-libbsd`.

Happy to build these but actual testing is up to someone else who has the hardware. 

> The selection provides a good indication on building vertical stacks in use.

Yes. And the cron sweeper actually builds the vertical BSP stacks in the RSB. I suppose it needs to grow to include building deployment. But that will take time to get to.

> Do we need to make sure EPICS builds?

"We" needs to be the community or you. The side excursion with newlib breaking us for MIPS and AArch64 ilp32 has delayed putting out a community request for help testing.

Also do not ignore other frameworks.  cFS should be OK since I was told they use GCC 15 on some Linux targets already. But in a perfect world, users should build their stack and application while we are under development (e.g. before branching).

-- 
View it on GitLab: https://gitlab.rtems.org/rtems/tools/rtems-source-builder/-/issues/116#note_127530
You're receiving this email because of your account on gitlab.rtems.org.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.rtems.org/pipermail/bugs/attachments/20250725/8f29a5f0/attachment.htm>