From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 14957 invoked by alias); 18 Dec 2002 19:00:56 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 14945 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2002 19:00:53 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO duracef.shout.net) (204.253.184.12) by 209.249.29.67 with SMTP; 18 Dec 2002 19:00:53 -0000 Received: (from mec@localhost) by duracef.shout.net (8.11.6/8.11.6) id gBIJ0cQ14489; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 13:00:38 -0600 Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 11:16:00 -0000 From: Michael Elizabeth Chastain Message-Id: <200212181900.gBIJ0cQ14489@duracef.shout.net> To: carlton@math.stanford.edu, drow@mvista.com Subject: Re: [patch] delete namespace __gnu_test from C++ testsuite Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com X-SW-Source: 2002-12/txt/msg00539.txt.bz2 I would change this code: # simple object, enum gdb_test "print test1.value" "\\$\[0-9\]* = egyptian" "simple object, enum" To: send_gdb "test1.value\n" gdb_expect { -re "\\$\[0-9\]+ = __gnu_test::egyptian\r\n$gdb_prompt $" { pass "simple object, enum } -re "\\$\[0-9\]+ = egyptain\r\n$gdb_prompt $" { fail "simple object, enum (gdb/895)" } -re ".*$gdb_prompt $" { fail "simple object, enum" } timeout { fail "simple object, enum (timeout)" } If the FAIL happens with a PR number, then anybody who is reviewing the results can look at the PR and notice that it says "this was broken in 5.3 as well". (Also when I do this kind of review, I just look in the gdb.log files and notice that the gdb output was the same, just the result changed). If the FAIL happens without a PR number, that is a genuinely new bug in gdb (or gcc), and deserves to be treated the same as any other regression. In the "= egyptian" case, I would call kfail or setup_kfail as soon as we start using KFAIL's. KFAIL is moving way up my priority list. If the "= egyptian" case is due to bad output from gcc, then I would add a big comment and then call setup_xfail (or call xfail outright). I would also want to have a gcc bug # in hand and refer to it in the test script source. Michael C