From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 17596 invoked by alias); 28 Jan 2010 18:38:51 -0000 Received: (qmail 17582 invoked by uid 22791); 28 Jan 2010 18:38:50 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.5 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; Thu, 28 Jan 2010 18:38:42 +0000 Received: from int-mx05.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx05.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.18]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o0SIcers021086 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK) for ; Thu, 28 Jan 2010 13:38:40 -0500 Received: from qcore.mollernet.net (vpn-10-206.rdu.redhat.com [10.11.10.206]) by int-mx05.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o0SIceTo030636; Thu, 28 Jan 2010 13:38:40 -0500 Message-ID: <4B61D9AF.3050002@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 28 Jan 2010 18:38:00 -0000 From: Chris Moller User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.1b3pre) Gecko/20090513 Fedora/3.0-2.3.beta2.fc11 Thunderbird/3.0b2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: tromey@redhat.com CC: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: Patch for PR 10728 References: <4B6096D9.1060606@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; 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: 2010-01/txt/msg00610.txt.bz2 On 01/28/10 13:09, Tom Tromey wrote: >>>>>> "Chris" == Chris Moller writes: >>>>>> > > > Chris> + untested psmang.exp > > Wrong name here, this occurs a few times. > Oops--the down side of cut'n'paste... > Chris> +send_gdb "print x->y2 - x->y1\n" > Chris> + > Chris> +gdb_expect { > > I think we are trying to avoid send_gdb+gdb_expect, as much as possible. > This test can comfortably be written using gdb_test, so do that. > I tried gdb_test to start with, but it didn't seem to be doing the right thing. I just went back to it and it's doing okay now--my original regex was probably screwed up. Do you want me to send you a new patch? Or just commit it? > Tom >