From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 21762 invoked by alias); 11 Dec 2011 09:26:26 -0000 Received: (qmail 21753 invoked by uid 22791); 11 Dec 2011 09:26:25 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-7.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Sun, 11 Dec 2011 09:26:11 +0000 Received: from int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.12]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id pBB9PvI3012666 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Sun, 11 Dec 2011 04:25:57 -0500 Received: from host2.jankratochvil.net (ovpn-116-39.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.116.39]) by int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id pBB9PrBk004355 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Sun, 11 Dec 2011 04:25:56 -0500 Date: Sun, 11 Dec 2011 12:42:00 -0000 From: Jan Kratochvil To: Joel Brobecker Cc: Tom Tromey , gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [commit] testsuite: KFAIL gdb.cp/static-method.exp [Re: Regression for gdb.base/sigstep.exp with .debug_types] Message-ID: <20111211092552.GA14574@host2.jankratochvil.net> References: <20111205081911.GG28486@adacore.com> <20111209171630.GA30059@host2.jankratochvil.net> <20111209171937.GA30594@host2.jankratochvil.net> <20111209215319.GA5132@host2.jankratochvil.net> <20111210160145.GA7261@host2.jankratochvil.net> <20111211024742.GN21915@adacore.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20111211024742.GN21915@adacore.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-IsSubscribed: yes 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: 2011-12/txt/msg00328.txt.bz2 On Sun, 11 Dec 2011 03:47:42 +0100, Joel Brobecker wrote: > > Therefore KFAILed it. (Not sure if it should be XFAIL or KFAIl but it does > > not matter much.) > > If it's not a bug in GDB, then I think it should be an XFAIL... IMO it depends on whether one considers "our" to be just GDB or whether "our" is the whole GNU Toolchain. Therefore if "our" is just GDB I can change all the already existing KFAILs with gcc/ gdb.cp/ptype-cv-cp.exp:setup_kfail "gcc/45997" *-*-* gdb.cp/temargs.exp:setup_kfail gcc/49366 "*-*-*" gdb.cp/temargs.exp:} else { setup_kfail gcc/49546 "*-*-*" } gdb.cp/temargs.exp:} else { setup_kfail gcc/49546 "*-*-*" } gdb.python/py-type.exp: setup_kfail "gcc/41736" *-*-* into XFAILs. So far both ways were in use: gdb.gdb/selftest.exp: setup_xfail "*-*-*" gcc/26475 gdb.java/jmain.exp: setup_xfail *-*-* gcc/16439 gdb.java/jmain.exp: setup_xfail *-*-* gcc/16439 gdb.java/jprint.exp: setup_xfail *-*-* gcc/43260 Thanks, Jan