From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 2947 invoked by alias); 8 Aug 2004 23:14:36 -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 2935 invoked from network); 8 Aug 2004 23:14:35 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO nevyn.them.org) (66.93.172.17) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 8 Aug 2004 23:14:35 -0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 4.34 #1 (Debian)) id 1Btws7-0006Rx-2V; Sun, 08 Aug 2004 19:14:35 -0400 Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2004 23:14:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Michael Chastain Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [testsuite] kfail sigaltstack.exp on i386/gnu/linux Message-ID: <20040808231435.GA24609@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Michael Chastain , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com References: <20040808220220.GA22738@nevyn.them.org> <4116A794.nail8VF11ICCH@mindspring.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4116A794.nail8VF11ICCH@mindspring.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.5.1+cvs20040105i X-SW-Source: 2004-08/txt/msg00282.txt.bz2 On Sun, Aug 08, 2004 at 06:22:12PM -0400, Michael Chastain wrote: > This patch is approved. > > It's okay to use a KFAIL even for an external bug. The gdb PR can be > put in class "external" and refer to some external bug report against a > different product, and the gdb PR can still serve as a locus of > information about the bug. I thought we had agreed that was the definition of XFAIL for GDB, an expected external failure? > 2004-08-08 Daniel Jacobowitz > > PR gdb/1736 > * gdb.base/sigaltstack.exp (finish_test): New procedure. KFAIL > for i?86-*-linux*. Checked in. -- Daniel Jacobowitz