From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 14583 invoked by alias); 22 Oct 2008 13:05:19 -0000 Received: (qmail 14569 invoked by uid 22791); 22 Oct 2008 13:05:18 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from eu1sys200aog017.obsmtp.com (HELO eu1sys200aog017.obsmtp.com) (207.126.144.131) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Wed, 22 Oct 2008 13:04:34 +0000 Received: from source ([164.129.1.35]) (using TLSv1) by eu1sys200aob017.postini.com ([207.126.147.11]) with SMTP; Wed, 22 Oct 2008 13:04:29 UTC Received: from zeta.dmz-eu.st.com (ns2.st.com [164.129.230.9]) by beta.dmz-eu.st.com (STMicroelectronics) with ESMTP id 4F975DAC8; Wed, 22 Oct 2008 13:04:25 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mail1.cro.st.com (mail1.cro.st.com [164.129.40.131]) by zeta.dmz-eu.st.com (STMicroelectronics) with ESMTP id 237BF4C241; Wed, 22 Oct 2008 13:04:25 +0000 (GMT) Received: from crx595.cro.st.com (crx595.cro.st.com [164.129.44.95]) by mail1.cro.st.com (MOS 3.8.7a) with ESMTP id CQE84508 (AUTH "denis pilat"); Wed, 22 Oct 2008 15:05:31 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <48FF24D8.4080204@st.com> Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2008 13:05:00 -0000 From: Denis PILAT User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.17 (X11/20080914) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Pierre Muller Cc: "'gdb-patches'" Subject: Re: Mingw gdb validation References: <48FC4417.2030807@st.com> <000001c9342a$189a83a0$49cf8ae0$@u-strasbg.fr> In-Reply-To: <000001c9342a$189a83a0$49cf8ae0$@u-strasbg.fr> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes 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: 2008-10/txt/msg00537.txt.bz2 Pierre Muller wrote: > I thought about this a while ago also, > and I was wondering if the best solution would not be to > have a global nl variable defined in gdb.exp > that would depend on the target you are testing. > I also thought at that time that we should > define two global variables: nl and nls. > "nl" as being something that is a single newline > defined generally as "\[\r\n\]" but probably as "\[\r\n\]\n?" for mingw32 > and > "nls" if more than one newline is allowed and should generally be simply > "\[\r\n\]*" > If it's more than one we should use "\[\r\n\]+". > Once these two variables are set in gdb.exp, > we should replace every "\[\r\n\]*" by a "$nls" > and all \[\r\n\]" by "$nl" in the expected answer part of the tests. > > > This should allow a lot of currently failing mingw32 test > to succeed. > It would also have the advantage of not changing > anything for other targets, unless we find other targets that > would benefit from a similar change, but that could then also > be inserted in gdb.exp special cases for nl and nls variables. > > Nevertheless, changing all tests to use nl and nls > is probably not an easy task... > That's just a long task, but I think it's easier than understanding why some tests require end-of-line testing, and some tests do not. See my previous mail about gdb.cp/userdef.exp. I'm afraid there could be some tests that has been written to match the gdb behavior, even if it was not a correct behavior. Denis