From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 17257 invoked by alias); 24 Nov 2009 19:20:56 -0000 Received: (qmail 17248 invoked by uid 22791); 24 Nov 2009 19:20:56 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 24 Nov 2009 19:20:51 +0000 Received: from int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.11]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id nAOJKoLf001830 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK) for ; Tue, 24 Nov 2009 14:20:50 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain (toner.yyz.redhat.com [10.15.16.55]) by int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id nAOJKntC006169 for ; Tue, 24 Nov 2009 14:20:50 -0500 Message-ID: <4B0C322E.7070503@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2009 19:20:00 -0000 From: Sami Wagiaalla User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.1.4pre) Gecko/20090922 Fedora/3.0-3.9.b4.fc12 Thunderbird/3.0b4 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [RFA 2/4] dwarf2_physname References: <4B0707E7.5010308@uglyboxes.com> <20091120220927.GA9589@caradoc.them.org> <4B0ABD84.5040606@redhat.com> <20091123170710.GA15216@caradoc.them.org> In-Reply-To: <20091123170710.GA15216@caradoc.them.org> 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: 2009-11/txt/msg00532.txt.bz2 On 11/23/2009 12:07 PM, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 08:51:16AM -0800, Keith Seitz wrote: >> On 11/20/2009 02:09 PM, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: >> >>> I am generally opposed to committing known regressions. If there are >>> supporting patches we need to get in first, let's do that; if there >>> are tests we decide to break, let's XFAIL or KFAIL them. That's the >>> only way we can make the testsuite more useful. >> >> Sami has a follow-on patch that he could submit to fix all of these >> tests (they all pass on archer-keiths-expr-cumulative). Perhaps it >> would be acceptable for Sami to submit that patchset when/if this >> patch is accepted? [His patches rely on this patchset.] > > If it applies on top of this, could he post it now? Then we can treat > them as a unit for review and testing purposes. > I looked into this. It turns out that this is fixed by the patches posted on the thread rooted at this message http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2009-07/msg00305.html Applying these patches prior to applying Keith's fixes the namespace.exp issues. Note: parts of keiths patch to do with removing references to linkage name from cp-support, cp-namespace.c, valops.c give rise to conflicts so I just remove those manually. Sami