Re: [RFA/mi-testsuite] XFAIL mi*-console.exp

Daniel Jacobowitz
2002-04-04T05:13:35Z

On Wed, Apr 03, 2002 at 11:27:13PM -0500, Andrew Cagney wrote:
> >These tests are testing for a feature that exists either nowhere or just in
> >simulators and some remote stubs: that the inferior's output goes through
> >GDB and is properly encoded by the MI layer. Since support isn't there for
> >many remote debugging stubs or for native, I think these two tests should
> >be
> >XFAIL'd. Does that make sense, Andrew? If so, OK to commit this?
>
> I believe GDB's rule for XFAIL is something that can't work (due to an
> external constraint) rather than doesn't work (due to a lack of code).
>
> Hence it was marked as a known bug rather than a limitation.

OK, so it isn't an XFAIL. I don't think FAIL is really appropriate
either; tests which test a not-yet-implemented feature (and one that I
think is a bad idea, for native targets, to be honest) don't add any
information by failing. UNSUPPORTED perhaps? Or just not running the
test in native setups, for now?

--
Daniel Jacobowitz Carnegie Mellon University
MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer