[RFA/testsuite] Adjust step-bt testcase

[RFA/testsuite] Adjust step-bt testcase

[Joel Brobecker]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 347 bytes --]

Hello Daniel,

  re: http://www.sourceware.org/ml/gdb/2006-08/msg00079.html

Would the attached patch fix your problem?

2006-08-09  Joel Brobecker  <brobecker@adacore.com>

        * gdb.base/step-bt.exp: Make hexadecimal address option in
        expected output of the backtrace commands.

Tested on x86-linux, no regression.

Thanks,
-- 
Joel

[-- Attachment #2: step-bt.diff --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 889 bytes --]

Index: step-bt.exp
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/src/src/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/step-bt.exp,v
retrieving revision 1.1
diff -u -p -r1.1 step-bt.exp
--- step-bt.exp	8 Aug 2006 21:50:54 -0000	1.1
+++ step-bt.exp	10 Aug 2006 04:10:02 -0000
@@ -63,7 +63,7 @@ gdb_test "stepi" \
          "step first instruction"
 
 gdb_test "bt" \
-         "#0 +0x\[0-9a-z\]+ in hello .*#1 +0x\[0-9a-z\]* in main.*" \
+         "#0 +(0x\[0-9a-z\]+)? in hello .*#1 +0x\[0-9a-z\]* in main.*" \
          "backtrace after first instruction step"
 
 gdb_test "stepi" \
@@ -71,6 +71,6 @@ gdb_test "stepi" \
          "step second instruction"
 
 gdb_test "bt" \
-         "#0 +0x\[0-9a-z\]+ in hello .*#1 +0x\[0-9a-z\]* in main.*" \
+         "#0 +(0x\[0-9a-z\]+)? in hello .*#1 +0x\[0-9a-z\]* in main.*" \
          "backtrace after second instruction step"
 

Re: [RFA/testsuite] Adjust step-bt testcase

[Daniel Jacobowitz]

On Wed, Aug 09, 2006 at 09:12:58PM -0700, Joel Brobecker wrote:
> Hello Daniel,
> 
>   re: http://www.sourceware.org/ml/gdb/2006-08/msg00079.html
> 
> Would the attached patch fix your problem?

Nope - the "in" is apparently optional too.  I tested and committed
this variant.

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery

2006-08-10  Joel Brobecker  <brobecker@adacore.com>
	    Daniel Jacobowitz  <dan@codesourcery.com>

	* gdb.base/step-bt.exp: Make hexadecimal address optional in
	expected output of the backtrace commands.

Index: step-bt.exp
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/src/src/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/step-bt.exp,v
retrieving revision 1.1
diff -u -p -r1.1 step-bt.exp
--- step-bt.exp	8 Aug 2006 21:50:54 -0000	1.1
+++ step-bt.exp	10 Aug 2006 13:03:19 -0000
@@ -63,7 +63,7 @@ gdb_test "stepi" \
          "step first instruction"
 
 gdb_test "bt" \
-         "#0 +0x\[0-9a-z\]+ in hello .*#1 +0x\[0-9a-z\]* in main.*" \
+         "#0 +(0x\[0-9a-z\]+ in )?hello .*#1 +(0x\[0-9a-z\]* in )?main.*" \
          "backtrace after first instruction step"
 
 gdb_test "stepi" \
@@ -71,6 +71,6 @@ gdb_test "stepi" \
          "step second instruction"
 
 gdb_test "bt" \
-         "#0 +0x\[0-9a-z\]+ in hello .*#1 +0x\[0-9a-z\]* in main.*" \
+         "#0 +(0x\[0-9a-z\]+ in )?hello .*#1 +(0x\[0-9a-z\]* in )?main.*" \
          "backtrace after second instruction step"
 

Re: [RFA/testsuite] Adjust step-bt testcase

[Joel Brobecker]

> Nope - the "in" is apparently optional too.  I tested and committed
> this variant.

Ah, yes, of course! Thanks for fixing it.

-- 
Joel