From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 27171 invoked by alias); 10 Oct 2013 18:31:20 -0000 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 Received: (qmail 27159 invoked by uid 89); 10 Oct 2013 18:31:20 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-3.6 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Thu, 10 Oct 2013 18:31:17 +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 r9AIVDQh012481 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Thu, 10 Oct 2013 14:31:13 -0400 Received: from barimba (ovpn-113-128.phx2.redhat.com [10.3.113.128]) by int-mx12.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r9AIVCOs012229 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Thu, 10 Oct 2013 14:31:12 -0400 From: Tom Tromey To: jose.marchesi@oracle.com (Jose E. Marchesi) Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] testsuite: skip morestack.exp in sparc targets References: <87d2nebocs.fsf@oracle.com> Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2013 18:31:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <87d2nebocs.fsf@oracle.com> (Jose E. Marchesi's message of "Wed, 09 Oct 2013 14:49:55 +0200") Message-ID: <87siw96kr3.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-SW-Source: 2013-10/txt/msg00354.txt.bz2 Jose> 2013-10-09 Jose E. Marchesi Jose> * gdb.base/morestack.exp: Skip test in sparc targets, where Jose> -fsplit-stack is not supported. What is the current failure mode? I think it would be better to feature-test the compiler rather than adding a white- or black-list. The latter I think it possibly even worse than an "unsupported" in the test results. Tom