From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 8341 invoked by alias); 21 Jan 2004 05:23:30 -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 8330 invoked from network); 21 Jan 2004 05:23:27 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO localhost.redhat.com) (65.49.4.239) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 21 Jan 2004 05:23:27 -0000 Received: from gnu.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E3C342B8F; Wed, 21 Jan 2004 00:23:24 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <400E0CCC.7020906@gnu.org> Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2004 05:23:00 -0000 From: Andrew Cagney User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; NetBSD macppc; en-US; rv:1.0.2) Gecko/20030820 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Michael Elizabeth Chastain , Daniel Jacobowitz Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [patch/rfc/testsuite] Test GDB on not-so-little core files References: <20040121044245.A9C6A4B359@berman.michael-chastain.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2004-01/txt/msg00574.txt.bz2 > BTW, Michael, any thoughts on how to fail this on systems that can't >> efficiently dump a 3g core file? Skip the test I guess, but with which >> mechanism? untested? > > > Unconditional UNTESTED is simple and good. "Hey, what happened with > the 3 gigabyte core dump test?" "Oh, it says UNTESTED". It's pretty > clear to me what that means. > > As for *how* to do it, that is harder. > > The real issue is that the criterion is not really "what is the target > triple", but "what are the resources of the specific test bed". Like, > Daniel J says that it would be awkward to enable it in the Debian > version. And it's useless for me on HP Test Drive, because I run into a > ulimit at 1 gigabyte. That's a property of HP-TD policy, not of the > hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.11 target. I dunno how to encode that kind of > criterion in the test suite. Daniel, did you get to try this test? So far the problem I've hit is with kernel's that can't write generate core files - they end up really trying to write write / consume gb worth of disk. Fortunatly those OSs families should be easy to identify and skip. Andrew