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

[Andrew Cagney <ac131313@cygnus.com>]

> I think you all missed this one...
> 
> Fernando Nasser wrote:
> 
>> 
>> Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> 
>> >
>> > That's
>> > why I'd rather XFAIL than skip the tests.
>> >
> 
>> 
>> It would be "unsupported" (which means that some feature is not
>> supported in this platform and so we can't run the test).

Ah, here it is "unimplemented" :-)  The platform does have the 
mechanisms needed to implement this, just not the code.

--

Aside, fernando and I had a brief discussion about xfail vs unsupported 
and came up with the following concrete example.

Attach/detach:

FreeBSD has a bug in its detach, since at present it doesn't work but 
did in the past, and will again in the next release it will work, it 
gets marked as ``xfail'.  Next release it will mysteriously ``xpass'' 
and can be adjusted accordingly.

Cygwin, due to limitations in the underlying OS, simply wasn't able to 
support detach, it should be marked as ``unsupported''.  (As a foot 
note, recent versions of the underlying OS, did fix this limitation).

Andrew