From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 129734 invoked by alias); 20 Jan 2017 20:00:47 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 123535 invoked by uid 89); 20 Jan 2017 20:00:43 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-HELO: relay1.mentorg.com Received: from relay1.mentorg.com (HELO relay1.mentorg.com) (192.94.38.131) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Fri, 20 Jan 2017 20:00:43 +0000 Received: from svr-orw-mbx-03.mgc.mentorg.com ([147.34.90.203]) by relay1.mentorg.com with esmtp id 1cUfMX-0002PX-Vd from Luis_Gustavo@mentor.com ; Fri, 20 Jan 2017 12:00:41 -0800 Received: from [172.30.9.36] (147.34.91.1) by svr-orw-mbx-03.mgc.mentorg.com (147.34.90.203) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1210.3; Fri, 20 Jan 2017 12:00:38 -0800 Reply-To: Luis Machado Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix uppercase test names in gdb.python/py-xmethods.exp References: <1484923045-16703-1-git-send-email-lgustavo@codesourcery.com> <1ea54e93-2d77-e90c-5129-3a0a82301ab1@codesourcery.com> <70e0a255-c215-2617-2714-229bfddf594c@redhat.com> <4b4b1baa-a8fd-25f0-1f5b-a4cd66cc3118@redhat.com> To: Pedro Alves , From: Luis Machado Message-ID: <00192a9b-0457-5b10-9008-512fddc22592@codesourcery.com> Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2017 20:00:00 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.5.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <4b4b1baa-a8fd-25f0-1f5b-a4cd66cc3118@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-ClientProxiedBy: svr-orw-mbx-04.mgc.mentorg.com (147.34.90.204) To svr-orw-mbx-03.mgc.mentorg.com (147.34.90.203) X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2017-01/txt/msg00428.txt.bz2 On 01/20/2017 10:45 AM, Pedro Alves wrote: > On 01/20/2017 03:43 PM, Luis Machado wrote: > >>> There's an "unsupported" call inside skip_python_tests. >> >> Hmm, i was working under the assumption this was a flag. > > Yeah, it's surprising. I wouldn't mind removing it. Maybe > make it a "verbose" call instead. > I'll get something out for that. >> In this case it >> would make sense to handle all of these checks in the same way and not >> add untested calls, making everything standard. >> I can work on that, but should we drop adding any untested calls in this >> particular patch and only return (until a follow on patch)? > > I gave it a second thought, and it's fine with me to add the > untested call, despite the UNSUPPORTED already present in gdb.sum. > > Patch is OK. I've pushed this to master with the untested calls as 23e829301bd42b3964f457d50e462195d4343590. Thanks, Luis