From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 25978 invoked by alias); 24 Oct 2002 19:29:58 -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 25911 invoked from network); 24 Oct 2002 19:29:57 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO localhost.redhat.com) (216.138.202.10) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 24 Oct 2002 19:29:57 -0000 Received: from redhat.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0A8AA3D4A; Thu, 24 Oct 2002 15:29:57 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <3DB84A34.6070801@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2002 12:29:00 -0000 From: Andrew Cagney User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; NetBSD macppc; en-US; rv:1.0.0) Gecko/20020824 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Daniel Jacobowitz Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [patch/rfc] Remove all setup_xfail's from testsuite/gdb.mi/ References: <3DB83EC1.6070609@redhat.com> <20021024190956.GA20879@nevyn.them.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2002-10/txt/msg00512.txt.bz2 > On Thu, Oct 24, 2002 at 02:41:05PM -0400, Andrew Cagney wrote: > >> Hello, >> >> GDB's testsuite is known to be full of xfails that are really kfails or >> testsuite bugs. Rather than try to audit each xfail in turn, the >> proposal as been to rip out all the xfails (creating a clean slate) and >> start marking up the tests from scratch - two steps forward but first >> one step back. >> >> I figure I might as well try to get the ball rolling on this and find >> out just how much real resistance there is going to be to a change like >> this. To that end, this removes all xfail's from the gdb.mi testsuite. >> Similar tests, for the other directories, would follow. > > > I'm known to be a testsuite nazi - I really, really dislike the current > failure levels, and people aren't doing much about it. I'm all in > favor of getting the ball rolling. But are you planning to do the > marking promptly, or just make us stare at even more MI failures for a > while? I've been staring at the mi-console one for a year... I believe that you're free to start kfailing things :-) As for me doing the kfail's, the chances of me getting back to that short term are, lets say, pretty remote. I'm just trying to get the process started - eliminate the task that's going to cop the most flack :-) > I know it's not practical to do them completely without getting the > testsuite run on a lot of systems, by a lot of people. But you can do > a fair first-order approximation without that. Andrew