Re: [rfa/testsuite/mi] Recognize a few incorrect outputs

[Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@mvista.com>]

On Fri, Sep 28, 2001 at 04:34:03PM -0400, Andrew Cagney wrote:
> > <gripe>
> > A lot of GDB tests seem to be written with only pass and timeout
> > alternatives, or only with overly-specialized fails.  The hypocrite-alert
> > readers of this message will note that I'm guilty of the same thing; this is
> > Just Enough to make them catch a few errors I could think of, not enough to
> > recognize completely wrong output.  Someday, someone more motivated than I
> > should clean this up.
> > </gripe>
> 
> For the MI, this is a pretty obvious fix.  I've been doing the same 
> thing my self (when I noticed it).  One suggestion, can you make that 
> fail expression less strict so that it picks.  Something like:
> 
> 	<correct-output> (gdb) <more-output> (gdb)
> 		pass
> 
> 	.* (gdb) .* (gdb)
> 		fail
> 
> 	timeout
> 		fail
> 
> alternatively (hmm, better?), keep the expression as you have it but add 
> a comment in paren vis:
> 
> 	fail "continue to incr_a (compiler bug info is wrong)"

Can we do that?  I was under the impression that "(timeout)" was
special.  If we can, I'll add both cases - for the wrong debug info and
for some unknown failing output.  I'm tempted to mark such tests XFAIL
if we can obviously detect that the compiler is at fault; admittedly,
the test isn't perfect, but it's still better than the current state of
affairs...

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz                           Carnegie Mellon University
MontaVista Software                         Debian GNU/Linux Developer