Re: [PATCH] obvious pattern fix in gdb.base/step-line.exp

[Joel Brobecker <brobecker@adacore.com>]

Hello Christophe,

> 2009-03-27  Christophe Lyon  <christophe.lyon@st.com>
> 
> 	testsuite/
> 	* gdb.base/step-line.exp: Fix pattern to allow full path before
> 	"step-line.c".

I'd love to have some feedback from the other maintainers on this one.

My first observation is that it doesn't fail for me when testing
out-of-tree, using either DWARF or stabs. So I'm wondering why
this is failure in Chistophe's case. Perhaps a dump of your debugging
information (filename/dirname info for step-line.c and the line table
as well) would allows to understand the difference.

That being said, I don't see that we make a guaranty at the user-level
that the name of the file will be printed using either its full path or
just the basename, or anthing in the middle.  So we could argue that
the output with the full path is equally valid and that the expected
output should therefore be enhanced to accept both.

WDYT?

> Index: gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/step-line.exp
> ===================================================================
> --- gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/step-line.exp	(revision 308)
> +++ gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/step-line.exp	(working copy)
> @@ -46,7 +46,7 @@ if ![runto_main] then {
>     return 0
>  }
>  
> -gdb_test "break f1" ".*Breakpoint 2 at .* file step-line.c.*" "break f1"
> +gdb_test "break f1" ".*Breakpoint 2 at .* file .*$srcfile.*" "break f1"
>  gdb_test "continue" \
>           "Continuing.*Breakpoint 2, f1 \\(i=4\\).*dummy \\(1, i\\);" \
>  	 "continue to f1"

-- 
Joel