Re: [PATCH 3/5] Read CTF by the ctf target

Pedro Alves
2013-03-01T09:15:18Z

On 03/01/2013 07:55 AM, Yao Qi wrote:
> On 03/01/2013 01:18 AM, Pedro Alves wrote:
>> We know from previous patches that the latest released
>> babeltrace breaks gdb, due to the lookup_enum function. Does
>> this catch that? I see namespacing fixes going into
>> babeltrace as recently as last 15th. Do we know if
>
> We are using babeltrace trunk now,

sure

> so the problem of lookup_enum function goes away.

the question really whether including those headers is enough
to catch that the user is building against a broken babeltrace,
or whether the test should try something more.

--
Pedro Alves