Re: [RFA/testsuite] Remove all remaining gdb_suppress_entire_file

[Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org>]

On Wed, Aug 09, 2006 at 09:51:10AM -0700, Joel Brobecker wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 08, 2006 at 10:10:11PM +0200, Mark Kettenis wrote:
> > > Hmm, I guess what I really want is an UNTESTED if the failure was to
> > > be expected (for example the ADA tests if there is no ADA compiler on
> > > the system) and an error if something went wrong that shouldn't have
> > > gone wrong (an ICE from GCC on one of the testsuite code snippets).
> > > However, there probably isn't always a clear distinction between the
> > > two.  For example, do we expect C++ snippets to compile on all
> > > systems?  I suppose Joel's patch is progress; we can always tweak
> > > things later if we feel the UNTESTEDs are inappropriate.
> > 
> > Sounds good to me.  We do expect most of the tests to compile on most
> > systems, except for those with "strange" dependencies - meaning
> > everything but C and C++ and anything with threads.  But I don't see
> > a good way to capture this information that isn't more trouble than
> > it's really worth.
> 
> Does it mean I should go ahead and commit this patch?

Yes, please.

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery