From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 28290 invoked by alias); 25 Oct 2002 01:25:10 -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 28183 invoked from network); 25 Oct 2002 01:25:09 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO localhost.redhat.com) (216.138.202.10) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 25 Oct 2002 01:25:09 -0000 Received: from redhat.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 083833D4A; Thu, 24 Oct 2002 21:25:08 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <3DB89D73.8030405@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2002 18:25:00 -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: Michael Snyder Cc: Daniel Jacobowitz , 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> <3DB84A34.6070801@redhat.com> <20021024195912.GA12331@nevyn.them.org> <3DB864A2.6010801@redhat.com> <20021024212629.GA16334@nevyn.them.org> <3DB86B1A.8050003@redhat.com> <3DB86D05.6261C67@redhat.com> <3DB885F7.8050405@redhat.com> <3DB891E5.15E95AE6@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2002-10/txt/msg00539.txt.bz2 > Andrew Cagney wrote: > >> > >> > But nobody will... >> > > >> >> >> >> In one hit, or here and there? I know I will. I just won't be spending >> >> a solid week reviewing all of them. > >> > >> > >> > Well, so far we've got two nays. Why don't Daniel and I shut up, >> > and wait to see if there are any yays? > >> >> Michael, it might still be helpful if you could summarise the technical >> grounds for your position. This isn't a question of yay/nay but rather >> a technical and strategic problem that needs to be resolved. > > > > I feel like I've said all there is to be said about it. > Relatively few people work on mi or mi tests. BTW, at present it looks like Keith, JeffJ and ElenaZ hacking on MI. Add in QNX people reporting bugs and Apple people with their patches and this is getting scary! > It seems to me more productive if we start on a small subset > of tests that a large number of people may actually be > motivated to hack on. Including me. > You might say, I want to play, and choosing mi excludes me from the game. The intent is to remove the XFAILs from all directories in quick succession. You won't have long to wait before a directory you're interested in becomes available. Hmm, I also think that trying to do a small subsets will make things more confusing and less productive. Assuming that someone can be found to co-ordinate this, and drive it through in a very timely manner, it will lead to a situtation where the the test results slowly decay over time (as each subset is attacked). I think it is better to just purge the problem with a single flush. That way, from that point on, we'll know that the results can only get better. Given this problem, I think I'll revise my patch so that it does flush everything in a single hit. Andrew