Re: [RFA]: Fix for pending breakpoints in manually loaded/unloaded shlibs

[Jeff Johnston <jjohnstn@redhat.com>]

Michael Chastain wrote:
> Jeff Johnston <jjohnstn@redhat.com> wrote:
> 
>>The test should behave the same because the gdb code that generates
>>the message it is checking hasn't been committed yet.  On retrospect,
>>perhaps I should not have committed the testcase in with this
>>particular check in place (the test itself is a valid one regardless).
>>There has been some questions regarding whether I should be using an
>>observer or not.  Knowing that, do I still need to do the following or
>>can I check the change I attached in once I get final approval on the
>>code and most importantly, the message to be issued?
> 
> 
> I don't quite follow you, but if you are asking: can you check in
> a change to the test script before you check in a change to gdb:
> in general, you can do that.
> 
> If the test script accepts both old+new messages, and the new message is
> not wildly more complex than the old message, then testing with the old
> message alone is good enough for getting the test script approved.
> Just pop out the new patch and say how / what system you tested on.
> 
> If that's not what you mean, I'm confused.
>

The test fails now because gdb is not issuing the message that is currently in 
the test script.  The message in the test script is a new message which does not 
currently exist and never did in any gdb release.  When I get approval to check 
the gdb code in "and" change the test script, the test will succeed because it 
will match the actual message checked in.  I don't see a version issue of old 
gdb looked for x and new gdb looks for y.  Old gdb will always fail and new gdb 
will always work.  Thus, I was wondering if I still need to have checks for old 
and new messages in the script.

-- Jeff J.