From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 25748 invoked by alias); 20 Jan 2006 23:09:20 -0000 Received: (qmail 25739 invoked by uid 22791); 20 Jan 2006 23:09:19 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from nevyn.them.org (HELO nevyn.them.org) (66.93.172.17) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31.1) with ESMTP; Fri, 20 Jan 2006 23:09:18 +0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 4.54) id 1F05Nc-0005ZP-3d for gdb-patches@sourceware.org; Fri, 20 Jan 2006 18:09:16 -0500 Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 23:09:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [ob] More warnings; Call for assistance Message-ID: <20060120230915.GB21181@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: <20060117151730.GA2420@nevyn.them.org> <20060117152156.GA3115@nevyn.them.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20060117152156.GA3115@nevyn.them.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.8i X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2006-01/txt/msg00258.txt.bz2 On Tue, Jan 17, 2006 at 10:21:56AM -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > On Tue, Jan 17, 2006 at 10:17:31AM -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > > @@ -161,7 +161,7 @@ find_complaint (struct complaints *compl > > before we stop whining about it? Default is no whining at all, > > since so many systems have ill-constructed symbol files. */ > > > > -static unsigned int stop_whining = 0; > > +static int stop_whining = 0; > > > > /* Print a complaint, and link the complaint block into a chain for > > later handling. */ > > Oops! I did check that this was correct within the logic of the file, > but it still causes three test failures. gdb.cp/maint.exp does > "set complaints -1" and expects to get all complaints. > > This is a var_zinteger, which is supposed to be signed - thus my > change. What maint.exp is doing is undocumented, and seems passingly > illogical to me; does anyone object to my changing it to "set > complaints 1000"? > > The manual says: > > `set complaints LIMIT' > Permits GDB to output LIMIT complaints about each type of unusual > symbols before becoming silent about the problem. Set LIMIT to > zero to suppress all complaints; set it to a large number to > prevent complaints from being suppressed. There were no objections, so I've checked this in. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery 2006-01-20 Daniel Jacobowitz * gdb.cp/maint.exp: Set complaints to a positive value. Index: testsuite/gdb.cp/maint.exp =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/src/src/gdb/testsuite/gdb.cp/maint.exp,v retrieving revision 1.3 diff -u -p -r1.3 maint.exp --- testsuite/gdb.cp/maint.exp 11 Feb 2004 14:01:25 -0000 1.3 +++ testsuite/gdb.cp/maint.exp 20 Jan 2006 23:07:52 -0000 @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@ -# Copyright 2003, 2004 Free Software Foundation Inc. +# Copyright 2003, 2004, 2006 Free Software Foundation Inc. # This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify # it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by @@ -59,7 +59,7 @@ proc test_first_component {} { # The function in question might complain; make sure that we see # all complaints. - gdb_test "set complaints -1" "" + gdb_test "set complaints 1000" "" test_single_component "foo" test_single_component "operator<<"