From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 18167 invoked by alias); 18 Aug 2004 23:33:32 -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 18160 invoked from network); 18 Aug 2004 23:33:30 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO blount.mail.mindspring.net) (207.69.200.226) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 18 Aug 2004 23:33:30 -0000 Received: from user-119a90a.biz.mindspring.com ([66.149.36.10] helo=berman.michael-chastain.com) by blount.mail.mindspring.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 1BxZvm-0002X2-00; Wed, 18 Aug 2004 19:33:22 -0400 Received: from mindspring.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by berman.michael-chastain.com (Postfix) with SMTP id CF42E4B102; Wed, 18 Aug 2004 19:33:30 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 23:33:00 -0000 From: Michael Chastain To: ibr@ata.cs.hun.edu.tr Subject: Re: testcase for "absolute source" patch Cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Message-ID: <4123E749.nail65Z1YIZ3O@mindspring.com> References: <20040816144349.GB1509@ata.cs.hun.edu.tr> <412107B7.nailE7I1XJVIH@mindspring.com> <20040818130626.GB1411@ata.cs.hun.edu.tr> <4123763C.nailM3P11DT7E@mindspring.com> <20040818155324.GC1411@ata.cs.hun.edu.tr> <4123A736.nail5OO17XN7L@mindspring.com> <20040818220613.GA3143@ata.cs.hun.edu.tr> In-Reply-To: <20040818220613.GA3143@ata.cs.hun.edu.tr> User-Agent: nail 10.8 6/28/04 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2004-08/txt/msg00571.txt.bz2 Okay. I went and stared into space for a while about this. Here is what I am going to do. I had a public comment period about build != host. So everybody's had a chance to provide input. Well, everybody who as active in gdb at a certain time last month. I'm going to sleep on it. Tomorrow morning, I'll make a final decision about build != host, one way or the other. If I kill build != host, and Eli accepts my doco patch, then we can proceed with openp.exp. openp.exp will get a lot simpler too. (BTW, when I ran the last version you sent me, I got 39 ERROR results and zero PASS, so it needs some more work). It still might run into infrastructure problems, but they will be much less complex when you can actually use "cd" in the test script. If I keep build != host, then openp.exp is dead until we have more infrastructure, probably a replacement for default_target_compile will be needed. I know it's very discouraging to work on a patch and then have it rejected. I've had patches rejected. I hope this doesn't make you forsake gdb. Michael