From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 20378 invoked by alias); 29 Jun 2010 22:09:15 -0000 Received: (qmail 20368 invoked by uid 22791); 29 Jun 2010 22:09:15 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from rock.gnat.com (HELO rock.gnat.com) (205.232.38.15) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 29 Jun 2010 22:09:11 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E0EF2BABA2; Tue, 29 Jun 2010 18:09:09 -0400 (EDT) Received: from rock.gnat.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rock.gnat.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id mBAJxAmCOPXG; Tue, 29 Jun 2010 18:09:09 -0400 (EDT) Received: from joel.gnat.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5BF082BABA9; Tue, 29 Jun 2010 18:09:09 -0400 (EDT) Received: by joel.gnat.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id AE0AAF5895; Tue, 29 Jun 2010 15:09:04 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2010 22:09:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: Jan Kratochvil Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: ping: [patch 5/6] testsuite: Fix prelink-support.exp without prelink installed Message-ID: <20100629220904.GV2595@adacore.com> References: <20100329161831.GD2940@host0.dyn.jankratochvil.net> <20100609150954.GE7183@host0.dyn.jankratochvil.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20100609150954.GE7183@host0.dyn.jankratochvil.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) 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: 2010-06/txt/msg00688.txt.bz2 > gdb/testsuite/ > 2010-03-29 Jan Kratochvil > > Cope with missing /usr/sbin/prelink. > * lib/prelink-support.exp (prelink_no): > : New. > (prelink_yes): Likewise. Return on failed prelink_no. This should be OK. I'm just concerned about matching the output from the prelink command, since it is assuming that it is going to be in English. Do you know if we force the language in the testsuite? I'm just wondering whether a more straightforward/brutal approach might be simpler and as effective: What if we searched for prelink in the PATH and skipped the entire test if not found? > + # Without prelink at lest verify all the binaries do not contain the > + # ".gnu.prelink_undo" section so that they are not already prelinked. Missing comma, and spell-o: # Without prelink, at le*a*st verify *that* all the binaries do not # contain the ".gnu.prelink_undo" section (which would mean that they # have already been prelinked). > + # While we could check if $arg is already prelinked (as if someone > + # uninstalls prelink after having the system ld.so prelinked) we cannot > + # change its prelinked address. Therefore rather skip the test. I'm not a big fan of "as if [...]" in the case of documentation. It's OK when spoken, but it's a little too subtle for written documentation. I suggest something plainer: # We could not find prelink. We could check whether $args is already # prelinked but we don't, because: # - It is unlikely that someone uninstalls prelink after having # prelinked the system ld.so; # - We still cannot change its prelinked address. # Therefore, we just skip the test. -- Joel