From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 26048 invoked by alias); 24 Apr 2009 23:26:26 -0000 Received: (qmail 26040 invoked by uid 22791); 24 Apr 2009 23:26:25 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,HK_OBFDOM X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mailhost.u-strasbg.fr (HELO mailhost.u-strasbg.fr) (130.79.200.155) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 24 Apr 2009 23:26:20 +0000 Received: from baal.u-strasbg.fr (baal.u-strasbg.fr [IPv6:2001:660:2402::41]) by mailhost.u-strasbg.fr (8.14.2/jtpda-5.5pre1) with ESMTP id n3ONONCC074482 ; Sat, 25 Apr 2009 01:24:24 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mailserver.u-strasbg.fr (ms1.u-strasbg.fr [IPv6:2001:660:2402:d::10]) by baal.u-strasbg.fr (8.14.0/jtpda-5.5pre1) with ESMTP id n3ONONLS029161 ; Sat, 25 Apr 2009 01:24:23 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from muller@ics.u-strasbg.fr) Received: from d620muller (lec67-4-82-230-53-140.fbx.proxad.net [82.230.53.140]) (user=mullerp mech=LOGIN) by mailserver.u-strasbg.fr (8.14.3/jtpda-5.5pre1) with ESMTP id n3ONOLxF055370 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5 bits=128 verify=NO) ; Sat, 25 Apr 2009 01:24:22 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from muller@ics.u-strasbg.fr) From: "Pierre Muller" To: "'Tom Tromey'" , "'Joel Brobecker'" Cc: References: <001901c9c399$81854fe0$848fefa0$@u-strasbg.fr> <002a01c9c3df$d77f5760$867e0620$@u-strasbg.fr> In-Reply-To: Subject: RE: [RFC] Change OK: to ARI: for ARI rule ignore Date: Fri, 24 Apr 2009 23:26:00 -0000 Message-ID: <007501c9c533$d0a9c240$71fd46c0$@u-strasbg.fr> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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 X-SW-Source: 2009-04/txt/msg00700.txt.bz2 Thanks to Joel and Tom for their answers. I checked the source patch in. The only thing is that the 6.8 branch will have new warnings because the OK patterns are not disregarded anymore, but I don't think that we will ever release a 6.8.1 anyhow! My initial idea for gdb_ari.sh turned out to be wrong (I got more regression) The final diff for gdb_ari.sh looks like this: $ cvs diff gdb_ari.sh Index: gdb_ari.sh =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/gdbadmin/ss/gdb_ari.sh,v retrieving revision 1.89 diff -r1.89 gdb_ari.sh 149a150,152 > if (ARI_OK == bug) { > return > } 208,209c211,225 < # Skip OK lines < /\/\* OK \*\// || /\/\* OK: / || /\/\* ARI: / { next; } --- > # Skip ARI lines > > BEGIN { > ARI_OK = "" > } > > /\/\* ARI:[[:space:]]*(.*)[[:space:]]*\*\// { > ARI_OK = gensub(/^.*\/\* ARI:[[:space:]]*(.*[^[:space:]])[[:space:]]*\*\/.*$/, "\\1", 1, $0) > # print "ARI line found \"" $0 "\"" > # print "ARI_OK \"" ARI_OK "\"" > } > ! /\/\* ARI:[[:space:]]*(.*)[[:space:]]*\*\// { > ARI_OK = "" > } > Is this OK? Pierre