From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 6215 invoked by alias); 29 Apr 2011 14:10:26 -0000 Received: (qmail 6199 invoked by uid 22791); 29 Apr 2011 14:10:24 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,SPF_HELO_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD 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; Fri, 29 Apr 2011 14:10:11 +0000 Received: from int-mx12.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx12.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.25]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p3TEA5TQ012351 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Fri, 29 Apr 2011 10:10:05 -0400 Received: from dhcp-25-89.brq.redhat.com (pdp-11.brq.redhat.com [10.34.24.63]) by int-mx12.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p3TEA3mr021918; Fri, 29 Apr 2011 10:10:04 -0400 Message-ID: <4DBAC6BB.4030402@redhat.com> Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2011 14:10:00 -0000 From: Marek Polacek User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.9) Gecko/20100827 Red Hat Thunderbird/3.1.3 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Pedro Alves CC: "gdb-patches@sourceware.org" Subject: Re: [RFC] Fixing gdb.base/completion.exp (PR testsuite/12649) References: <4DB82F26.30801@redhat.com> <4DB85510.90808@redhat.com> <201104281519.21615.pedro@codesourcery.com> <201104281614.31962.pedro@codesourcery.com> In-Reply-To: <201104281614.31962.pedro@codesourcery.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 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: 2011-04/txt/msg00557.txt.bz2 On 04/28/2011 05:14 PM, Pedro Alves wrote: > Are you sure? I did't see that when I try it. For instance this is OK: gdb_test_no_output "complete hfgfh" "complete 'hfgfh'" but this is not: gdb_test_no_output "hfgfh\t" "complete 'hfgfh'" > And I'd much rather we do this (remote the races) as first step instead > of completely rewriting the whole test file into something completely > different... Good point. > A follow up step would convert/simplify the send_gdb+gdb_expects > into gdb_test&friends. Something like this attempt? http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2011-04/msg00538.html > Here's a better one. Perfect! It looks good--seems like all the racy cases are gone. Should this be applied now? Thank you. Marek