From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 11240 invoked by alias); 16 Jan 2007 06:42:25 -0000 Received: (qmail 11231 invoked by uid 22791); 16 Jan 2007 06:42:25 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from zigzag.lvk.cs.msu.su (HELO zigzag.lvk.cs.msu.su) (158.250.17.23) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Tue, 16 Jan 2007 06:42:20 +0000 Received: from Debian-exim by zigzag.lvk.cs.msu.su with spam-scanned (Exim 4.50) id 1H6i1M-0001s4-EN for gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com; Tue, 16 Jan 2007 09:42:17 +0300 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=ip6-localhost) by zigzag.lvk.cs.msu.su with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA:32) (Exim 4.50) id 1H6i1C-0001rV-8V; Tue, 16 Jan 2007 09:42:02 +0300 From: Vladimir Prus To: Nick Roberts Subject: Re: MI failures related to string printing Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2007 06:42:00 -0000 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.1 Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com References: <200701121351.29310.vladimir@codesourcery.com> <17836.26533.146945.793792@kahikatea.snap.net.nz> In-Reply-To: <17836.26533.146945.793792@kahikatea.snap.net.nz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200701160941.59975.ghost@cs.msu.su> Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2007-01/txt/msg00356.txt.bz2 On Tuesday 16 January 2007 08:50, Nick Roberts wrote: > > Is there any chance you'll robustify the testsuite? > > If your just talking about the one FAIL in mi-var-child.exp, why not just mark > it as an XFAIL? I see that the other XFAIL actually passes (for me, at least). Why should it be an XFAIL? The test was working fine before your change, and I see no reason why the test cannot be modified to always pass. - Volodya