From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-patches-return-19658-listarch-gdb-patches=sourceware.cygnus.com@sources.redhat.com>
Received: (qmail 31147 invoked by alias); 24 Oct 2002 22:36:07 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-patches-subscribe@sources.redhat.com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com
Received: (qmail 31094 invoked from network); 24 Oct 2002 22:36:06 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO localhost.redhat.com) (216.138.202.10)
  by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 24 Oct 2002 22:36:06 -0000
Received: from redhat.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 4E1C53E32; Thu, 24 Oct 2002 18:36:05 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <3DB875D5.70203@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2002 15:36:00 -0000
From: Andrew Cagney <ac131313@redhat.com>
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: David Carlton <carlton@math.stanford.edu>
Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: [patch/rfc] Remove all setup_xfail's from testsuite/gdb.mi/
References: <3DB83EC1.6070609@redhat.com>	<ro1y98nzfca.fsf@jackfruit.Stanford.EDU> <3DB86CB6.10801@redhat.com> <ro165vrzd5y.fsf@jackfruit.Stanford.EDU>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-SW-Source: 2002-10/txt/msg00530.txt.bz2

> On Thu, 24 Oct 2002 17:57:10 -0400, Andrew Cagney <ac131313@redhat.com> said:
> 
> 
>> I think Elena mentioned KFAIL.
> 
> 
> Yeah, she did, I just glossed over that the first time I read her
> message.
> 
> 
>> Any way, that is want you want to use - you'll need to bug report
>> any failures though.
> 
> 
> Will do.
> 
> 
>> A fairly good definition is:
> 
> 
>> KFAIL == bug, in GDB, something to fix.
>> XFAIL == bug, not in GDB (kernel, debug info, linker, ...), something
>> to ignore.
> 
> 
> Ah, I see, thanks.  And then FAIL == regression in GDB?  Then
> doubtless XFAIL is being overused, so they should be changed to KFAIL
> or FAIL.

Right.  They should be changed back to FAILs (I don't see anyone 
complaining about how the removal of XFAILs also the passes to increase :-).

Then people can start auding all the FAILs (not just the XFAILs) and 
mark up any bugs that are not going to be immediatly fixed.

Andrew