From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 6168 invoked by alias); 29 Jul 2004 23:30:54 -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 6160 invoked from network); 29 Jul 2004 23:30:53 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 29 Jul 2004 23:30:53 -0000 Received: from int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (int-mx1.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.254]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i6TNUre3016296 for ; Thu, 29 Jul 2004 19:30:53 -0400 Received: from localhost.redhat.com (porkchop.devel.redhat.com [172.16.58.2]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id i6TNUqa29223; Thu, 29 Jul 2004 19:30:52 -0400 Received: from gnu.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 165C22B9D; Thu, 29 Jul 2004 19:30:48 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <410988A7.9000706@gnu.org> Date: Thu, 29 Jul 2004 23:30:00 -0000 From: Andrew Cagney User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; NetBSD macppc; en-GB; rv:1.4.1) Gecko/20040217 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Mark Kettenis Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [commit] Eliminate add_setshow_cmd References: <41080269.5000100@gnu.org> <200407292323.i6TNN0Ij024552@elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org> In-Reply-To: <200407292323.i6TNN0Ij024552@elgar.kettenis.dyndns.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2004-07/txt/msg00475.txt.bz2 > From: Andrew Cagney > Date: Wed, 28 Jul 2004 15:45:45 -0400 > > Hello, > > This patch eliminates add_setshow_cmd replacing it with the more > formally typed add_setshow_string_cmd and add_setshow_filename_cmd (also > add_setshow_zinteger_cmd in a few places). > > Andrew, did you run the testsuite after making these changes? I now see: > > FAIL: gdb.base/help.exp: help set complaints > > and > > FAIL: gdb.base/help.exp: help show complaints > > so it looks like the output has changed in some subtle way. I did, but looks like I didn't look close enough at the results. Which system? Andrew