From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 14152 invoked by alias); 13 Feb 2006 16:49:07 -0000 Received: (qmail 14143 invoked by uid 22791); 13 Feb 2006 16:49:07 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from sibelius.xs4all.nl (HELO sibelius.xs4all.nl) (82.92.89.47) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Mon, 13 Feb 2006 16:49:06 +0000 Received: from elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl (root@elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl [192.168.0.2]) by sibelius.xs4all.nl (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k1DGmWu8003777; Mon, 13 Feb 2006 17:48:32 +0100 (CET) Received: from elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl (kettenis@localhost.sibelius.xs4all.nl [127.0.0.1]) by elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl (8.13.4/8.13.3) with ESMTP id k1DGmVVf005883; Mon, 13 Feb 2006 17:48:31 +0100 (CET) Received: (from kettenis@localhost) by elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl (8.13.4/8.13.4/Submit) id k1DGmUqx009322; Mon, 13 Feb 2006 17:48:30 +0100 (CET) Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2006 16:49:00 -0000 Message-Id: <200602131648.k1DGmUqx009322@elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl> From: Mark Kettenis To: fnf@specifix.com CC: mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl, drow@false.org, gdb-patches@sourceware.org In-reply-to: <200602131118.49981.fnf@specifix.com> (message from Fred Fish on Mon, 13 Feb 2006 11:18:49 -0500) Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix problem with scope.exp test, skipping past init0 call References: <200602121510.01657.fnf@specifix.com> <200602131047.30428.fnf@specifix.com> <200602131604.k1DG4n9Y025733@elgar.sibelius.xs4all.nl> <200602131118.49981.fnf@specifix.com> 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: 2006-02/txt/msg00281.txt.bz2 > From: Fred Fish > Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2006 11:18:49 -0500 > > On Monday 13 February 2006 11:04, Mark Kettenis wrote: > > Hmm, if you didn't commit the fix yet, can you please hold off doing > > that for a bit? From your explanation below, it turns out that this > > might have caught a genuine genuine GDB bug. By "fixing" this we're > > likely not to notice that. > > I believe it also causing lots of other testsuite failures as well. > The scope.exp fix was special in that the original test was supposed > to handle needing two successive "next" commands to get past init0, > and that wasn't working. Ok. Can you file a bug report for the prologue analyzer bug? I'll take a look at fixing it. Mark