From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Keith Seitz <keiths@cygnus.com>
To: Michael Snyder <msnyder@cygnus.com>
Cc: Stephane Carrez <Stephane.Carrez@worldnet.fr>, <gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [RFA]: Fix gdb.base/callfwmall.exp for platforms without malloc
Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 10:56:00 -0000
Message-id: <Pine.GSO.4.33.0105211053000.16834-100000@ryobi.cygnus.com>
References: <3B0953AC.86578124@cygnus.com>
X-SW-Source: 2001-05/msg00392.html

On Mon, 21 May 2001, Michael Snyder wrote:

> No -- but perhaps we could approve a patch that would cause this
> test to be skipped (or xfailed) for targets in which we know it
> cannot pass.

Somewhere I am sitting on patches to change the behavior of this to XFAIL
if malloc does not exist. It does not rely on a particular config
variable. Instead, it queries gdb if malloc exists in the symbol table.

Would this be better? (Didn't we have this discussion a little while ago?
Deja vu?)

Keith