> Unfortunately you didn't pick the best example... please do something
> like issuing one UNSUPPORTED and then returning. 
> gdb_suppress_entire_file is evil.

I knew it! :-) (there's something evil, and sure enough I pick it)

UNSUPPORTED sounds better indeed. Thanks for the suggestion.

I'd like to put the call to unsupported inside gdb_compile_ada in order
to help having a certain consistency between all Ada testcases. So I'd
like to suggest the attached patch instead. The code in null_record.exp
can thus remain the same (simply abort if gdb_compile_ada returns a
failure, nothing else to do since the unsupported has already been
emitted).

2004-03-31  Joel Brobecker  <brobecker@gnat.com>

        * lib/ada.exp (gdb_compile_ada): Emit UNSUPPORTED if we failed
        to build the application. Remove the message printed when in
        verbose mode, redundant with the UNSUPPORTED message above.

(not sure if I used the proper terminology in the ChangeLog entry)

Otherwise, the other approach would be to add the call to unsupported
in null_record.exp itself. In that case, it might be nice to have the
reason for the failure. For that, we would need to update the message
returned by gdb_compile_ada to include that reason, and then include
that reason in the UNSUPPORTED message.

Would either approach be ok?
-- 
Joel