From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 8817 invoked by alias); 25 Feb 2004 05:19:11 -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 8810 invoked from network); 25 Feb 2004 05:19:10 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO nevyn.them.org) (66.93.172.17) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 25 Feb 2004 05:19:10 -0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 4.30 #1 (Debian)) id 1AvrRu-0007wV-BG; Wed, 25 Feb 2004 00:19:10 -0500 Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2004 05:19:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: fnf@redhat.com Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [RFA] Handle unsupported "-shared" in gdb1555.exp test Message-ID: <20040225051910.GA29717@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: fnf@redhat.com, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com References: <200402242157.59177.fnf@ninemoons.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200402242157.59177.fnf@ninemoons.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.1i X-SW-Source: 2004-02/txt/msg00723.txt.bz2 On Tue, Feb 24, 2004 at 09:57:59PM -0700, Fred Fish wrote: > There are 8 gdb tests that attempt to create a shared file using the > "-shared" option: > > gdb.base/gdb1555.exp > gdb.base/pending.exp > gdb.base/shlib-call.exp > gdb.base/shreloc.exp:51 > gdb.base/so-impl-ld.exp > gdb.base/so-indr-cl.exp > gdb.base/solib.exp:101 > gdb.threads/tls-shared.exp > > All of them, with the exception of gdb1555.exp and tls-shared.exp, > first do some test to see if this is expected to work for the target. This suggests that we need code in lib/gdb.exp to: - check whether shared library tests should be run - build shared libraries > I propose that the gdb1555.exp test use the "isnative" check. > Attached is a patch for review and comment. Please don't. I run cross-debugger tests which should test shared library support on a regular basis. I know this disagrees with prior art in the testsuite, but I would prefer not to propogate it further. How about something like: proc gdb_compile_solib { whatever } { if {[istarget whatever]} { return -1 } whatever } and using that to issue an unsupported (or silently return, I don't know which is the accepted practice). An alternative would be inclusive lists: {[istarget *-*-linux*] || [istarget *-*-bsd*] || ...} and so on as we teach the function how to build shared libraries in different settings. This might be the best idea. It is at this point that in any conversation about building shared librares that someone should normally suggest making the testsuite use libtool. I give advance warning that I will do my worst to anyone who makes such a suggestion. Libtool is a disgusting pile of dung. That's my opinion and I'll stand by it. -- Daniel Jacobowitz MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer