Re: [patch] New test for set backtrace related functionality

[Paul Gilliam <pgilliam@us.ibm.com>]

Michael,

I'ts been two weeks.  Please OK this so I can look good on my review 8-)

-=# Paul #=-

On Tuesday 26 October 2004 11:51, Paul Gilliam wrote:
> Michael,
>
> Here is the latest version of the patch.  Sorry I didn't get it turned
> around yesterday.
>
> I make a little chage to your suggested test names:
>
> On Friday 22 October 2004 14:48, Michael Chastain wrote:
> > How about:
> >
> >   set test "set backtrace"
> >   set test "full backtrace, ignore extra"
> >   set test "full backtrace, exact"
> >   set test "partial backtrace, with argument"
> >   set test "partial backtrace, with limit"
>
> set test "partial backtrace, via argument"
> set test "partial backtrace, via limit"
>
> I think "via" is better here than "with", but "using" would work well also.
>
> I have attached the new files.
>
> -=# Paul #=-