From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 650 invoked by alias); 27 Mar 2009 18:53:03 -0000 Received: (qmail 642 invoked by uid 22791); 27 Mar 2009 18:53:03 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,J_CHICKENPOX_93,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx2.redhat.com (HELO mx2.redhat.com) (66.187.237.31) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 27 Mar 2009 18:52:59 +0000 Received: from int-mx2.corp.redhat.com (int-mx2.corp.redhat.com [172.16.27.26]) by mx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n2RIovI9010838; Fri, 27 Mar 2009 14:50:57 -0400 Received: from ns3.rdu.redhat.com (ns3.rdu.redhat.com [10.11.255.199]) by int-mx2.corp.redhat.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id n2RIon6m018724; Fri, 27 Mar 2009 14:50:49 -0400 Received: from lindt.uglyboxes.com (sebastian-int.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.221]) by ns3.rdu.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n2RIosuh001215; Fri, 27 Mar 2009 14:50:56 -0400 Message-ID: <49CD200D.6050206@redhat.com> Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2009 19:05:00 -0000 From: Keith Seitz User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.19 (X11/20090105) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Pedro Alves CC: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [RFC] Special casing dtors? References: <49CAB139.8010100@redhat.com> <200903271439.40901.pedro@codesourcery.com> <49CD099F.9040009@redhat.com> <200903271734.56216.pedro@codesourcery.com> In-Reply-To: <200903271734.56216.pedro@codesourcery.com> 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: 2009-03/txt/msg00639.txt.bz2 Pedro Alves wrote: > I just confirmed this on x86-linux, to remove 64-bit out of > the picture. Okay, we have a problem. My machines show exactly the OPPOSITE behavior: templates.exp "destructor breakpoint" test KFAILs on both x86 and x86_64 GNU/Linux. After the patch, this test PASSes on both machines. The other failure you had (templates.exp value method breakpoint) PASSes on both machines before and after the patch. I can only guess that this has something to do with gcc... I'm using the F10 compiler, gcc version 4.3.2 20081105 (Red Hat 4.3.2-7). Keith