From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 14279 invoked by alias); 5 May 2006 20:06:13 -0000 Received: (qmail 14271 invoked by uid 22791); 5 May 2006 20:06:13 -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, 05 May 2006 20:06:11 +0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 4.54) id 1Fc6Yx-0001HV-DL; Fri, 05 May 2006 16:06:07 -0400 Date: Fri, 05 May 2006 20:06:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Nick Roberts Cc: "David S. Miller" , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [PATCH]: Fix gdb.mi/mi-regs.exp Message-ID: <20060505200607.GQ31029@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Nick Roberts , "David S. Miller" , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com References: <17465.33321.414493.769813@farnswood.snap.net.nz> <20060409.203142.76326217.davem@davemloft.net> <17466.931.119823.103959@farnswood.snap.net.nz> <20060410.002041.124255612.davem@davemloft.net> <20060410124326.GA20298@nevyn.them.org> <17467.1710.539269.777743@farnswood.snap.net.nz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <17467.1710.539269.777743@farnswood.snap.net.nz> 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: 2006-05/txt/msg00093.txt.bz2 On Tue, Apr 11, 2006 at 01:30:22PM +1200, Nick Roberts wrote: > I'm not sure if you're agreeing or not. I think I made the change to > mi_cmd_data_list_register_values which broke the test for sparc. As I ran > the testsuite on i386, I saw no failures of course. Right. Although, from what David said, it was already broken by an earlier (?) SPARC-specific change. > Clearly tests which check the registers are internally consistent and > sane for all architectures are desirable. Since no-one is offering > to do that shall I try to write a few generic ones as suggested > above? If you'd like to do this, by all means, please do. For now, we can fix up the SPARC tests, but I don't expect them to stay useful forever. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery