From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 12782 invoked by alias); 16 Jan 2007 06:48:29 -0000 Received: (qmail 12773 invoked by uid 22791); 16 Jan 2007 06:48:29 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mtagate3.de.ibm.com (HELO mtagate3.de.ibm.com) (195.212.29.152) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Tue, 16 Jan 2007 06:48:22 +0000 Received: from d12nrmr1607.megacenter.de.ibm.com (d12nrmr1607.megacenter.de.ibm.com [9.149.167.49]) by mtagate3.de.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l0G6mJgu137990 for ; Tue, 16 Jan 2007 06:48:20 GMT Received: from d12av02.megacenter.de.ibm.com (d12av02.megacenter.de.ibm.com [9.149.165.228]) by d12nrmr1607.megacenter.de.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v8.2) with ESMTP id l0G6mJD82678978 for ; Tue, 16 Jan 2007 07:48:19 +0100 Received: from d12av02.megacenter.de.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d12av02.megacenter.de.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.13.3) with ESMTP id l0G6mJTs009316 for ; Tue, 16 Jan 2007 07:48:19 +0100 Received: from [9.152.248.39] (dyn-9-152-248-39.boeblingen.de.ibm.com [9.152.248.39]) by d12av02.megacenter.de.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id l0G6mJ6l009307 for ; Tue, 16 Jan 2007 07:48:19 +0100 Message-ID: <45AC7532.6010108@de.ibm.com> Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2007 06:48:00 -0000 From: Markus Deuling User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.9 (X11/20070102) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: GDB Patches Subject: [RFA]: gdb/testsuite/gdb.arch/altivec-regs.exp Broken testcase Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2007-01/txt/msg00357.txt.bz2 Hi, I'm referring to http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2007-01/msg00353.html. It seems that the output from "show endian" has changed since the last time someone took a look into it :-) So I added a "re" to the test. Do we need this branch or can I delete it ? >> -re "(The target endianness is set automatically .currently )(big|little)( endian.*)$gdb_prompt $" { >> pass "endianness" >> set endianness $expect_out(2,string) >> } This is the result of gdb.arch/altivec-regs.exp with my patch: # of expected passes 209 # of unexpected failures 1 Is it ok to apply ? ChangeLog: *gdb.arch/altivec-regs.exp: Initialise variable endianness in every case. ========================================== diff -urN dev/gdb/testsuite/gdb.arch/altivec-regs.exp src/gdb/testsuite/gdb.arch/altivec-regs.exp --- dev/gdb/testsuite/gdb.arch/altivec-regs.exp 2007-01-10 15:48:12.000000000 +0100 +++ src/gdb/testsuite/gdb.arch/altivec-regs.exp 2007-01-16 07:40:05.000000000 +0100 @@ -88,12 +88,17 @@ gdb_test "next" "" "" +set endianness "" send_gdb "show endian\n" gdb_expect { -re "(The target endianness is set automatically .currently )(big|little)( endian.*)$gdb_prompt $" { pass "endianness" set endianness $expect_out(2,string) } + -re "The target is assumed to be big endian.*" { + pass "endianess" + set endianness "big" + } -re ".*$gdb_prompt $" { fail "couldn't get endianness" } Regards, Markus -- Markus Deuling GNU Toolchain for Linux on Cell BE deuling@de.ibm.com