From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 24880 invoked by alias); 18 Sep 2003 14:27:16 -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 24859 invoked from network); 18 Sep 2003 14:27:15 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO localhost.redhat.com) (207.219.125.131) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 18 Sep 2003 14:27:15 -0000 Received: from redhat.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DEC902B89; Thu, 18 Sep 2003 10:27:12 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <3F69C0C0.8070009@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 14:27:00 -0000 From: Andrew Cagney User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; NetBSD macppc; en-US; rv:1.0.2) Gecko/20030820 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Michael Elizabeth Chastain Cc: carlton@kealia.com, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [testsuite] add gdb.cp/gdb1355.exp References: <200309180201.h8I21hCr013787@duracef.shout.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2003-09/txt/msg00394.txt.bz2 > Okay, I'm willing to make it an XFAIL rather than a KFAIL. > I remember those threads. The XFAIL feels odd but it does stand > for "external" and this bug is indeed a textbook external bug. Consider the standard example: (gdb) detach PID On old windows systems it couldn't work. GDB reporting an error was an XFAIL, GDB dumping core was a fail. > As far as making it a FAIL goes, I think David's argument comes down to: > people pay attention to FAIL, but not to XFAIL or KFAIL. I really don't > like that situation. I see the question as: whether to fight the > situation and use more accurate XFAIL/KFAIL rather than generic FAIL, or > to acquiesce to situation and give people what they expect to see. > I favor the former. David is correct. Look at the number of additions to gdb.asm since it was changed to FAIL instead of ERROR. However, we've adopted KFAIL XFAIL. I also intend again proposing that existing XFAILS get yanked. Andrew