From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 15913 invoked by alias); 5 Apr 2002 18:23:04 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 15906 invoked from network); 5 Apr 2002 18:23:03 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO cygnus.com) (205.180.230.5) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 5 Apr 2002 18:23:03 -0000 Received: from redhat.com (rtl.cygnus.com [205.180.230.21]) by runyon.cygnus.com (8.8.7-cygnus/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA11650; Fri, 5 Apr 2002 10:22:49 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <3CADEAE1.FC0B53C0@redhat.com> Date: Fri, 05 Apr 2002 10:23:00 -0000 From: Fernando Nasser Organization: Red Hat Canada X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Michael Elizabeth Chastain CC: ac131313@cygnus.com, drow@mvista.com, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com, rob@welcomehome.org Subject: Re: RFC: KFAILs [Was: [RFA/mi-testsuite] XFAIL mi*-console.exp] References: <200204051753.g35HrUn23328@duracef.shout.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2002-04/txt/msg00173.txt.bz2 Michael Elizabeth Chastain wrote: > > Fernando Nasser writes: > > fna> KFAIL: could not run to marker1 (PRMS gdb/999) > fna> Would that make the scripts happy? > > Err, I'm not sure if you mean the dejagnu scripts, or my scripts. > My scripts are happy with this format. > Your scripts. > A lot of tests use "(...)" for various things, so the "PRMS" > and "gdb/NNN" bits need to be mandatory in order to pick out this > information from the noise. > > fna> setup_kfail "gdb/999" *-*-* > > Fine with me. setup_kfail *-*-* "gdb/999" is fine with me as well. > I can change things to accept the second form like setup_xfail does and just make sure that one with no '-' in it was found (the bug id) and error out if none was found. Just let me know if you prefer this instead of the positional first argument (I am now having second thoughts about that). > fna> 4) Note that, when a test that was expected to fail due to a known > fna> bug suddenly starts to pass, it becomes a KPASS (as XFAILs do). > > Okay, I added a KPASS column to my tables. > Ouch! That was a typo!!! Sorry Michael, I meant "XPASS (as XFAILs do)". There is no reason for us to have a different category for that (I think). My apologies. > fna> I will do it in Perl (I still don't know how to programmatically access > fna> the Gnats database though). But I have very little spare time, so I > fna> will not mind if someone that can do it sooner volunteers to do this. > > You can access the Gnats database through a URL: > > http://sources.redhat.com/cgi-bin/gnatsweb.pl?database=gdb&cmd=view&pr=460 > > For programmatic access, there may already be a more suitable "cmd" than > "cmd=view", or someone may need to update gnatsweb.pl. > > I volunteer to write Perl analysis scripts. My test bed is almost all Perl, > and I am planning to release it. > That would be great! Thanks! -- Fernando Nasser Red Hat Canada Ltd. E-Mail: fnasser@redhat.com 2323 Yonge Street, Suite #300 Toronto, Ontario M4P 2C9