From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-patches-return-53650-listarch-gdb-patches=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 21660 invoked by alias); 29 Jan 2008 16:16:29 -0000
Received: (qmail 21649 invoked by uid 22791); 29 Jan 2008 16:16:28 -0000
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from ics.u-strasbg.fr (HELO ics.u-strasbg.fr) (130.79.112.250)     by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Tue, 29 Jan 2008 16:16:02 +0000
Received: from ICSMULLER (laocoon.u-strasbg.fr [130.79.112.72]) 	by ics.u-strasbg.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1ED5318701C; 	Tue, 29 Jan 2008 17:22:23 +0100 (CET)
From: "Pierre Muller" <muller@ics.u-strasbg.fr>
To: "'Pedro Alves'" <pedro_alves@portugalmail.pt>
Cc: "'GDB Patches'" <gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
References: <479EB897.5030603@portugalmail.pt> <000f01c8624b$c284ee20$478eca60$@u-strasbg.fr> <479F44B5.2000406@portugalmail.pt>
In-Reply-To: <479F44B5.2000406@portugalmail.pt>
Subject: RE: skip __main
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 16:20:00 -0000
Message-ID: <001701c86292$3d1e43c0$b75acb40$@u-strasbg.fr>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; 	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0
Content-Language: en-us
Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gdb-patches.sourceware.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-patches-subscribe@sourceware.org>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org
X-SW-Source: 2008-01/txt/msg00682.txt.bz2

OK, you are right. It better to leave "main".

		=== gdb Summary ===
 
-# of expected passes		9704
-# of unexpected failures	326
+# of expected passes		9867
+# of unexpected failures	163
 # of expected failures		59
 # of known failures		21
 # of unresolved testcases	37

I was wondering: you get much less errors
than I do, do you have any special restrictions 
applied on your testsuite?

  The number of expected passes is also lower than
mine, maybe you didn't use 'cvs up -d' for  
a while in the testsuite directory?
This is my last result on CVS gdb
that I got using 
make check RUNTESTFLAGS='--ignore manythreads.exp'

		=== gdb Summary ===

# of expected passes		10619
# of unexpected failures	529
# of unexpected successes	1
# of expected failures		58
# of known failures		31
# of unresolved testcases	38
# of untested testcases		14
# of unsupported tests		34
With your patch and the same RUNTESTFLAGS,
I go down to:
# of expected passes            10787
# of unexpected failures        351
# of unexpected successes       1
# of expected failures          58
# of known failures             32
# of unresolved testcases       38
# of untested testcases         14
# of unsupported tests          34
So I also get 178 errors less!
  
This is really good!

Pierre