From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-patches-return-38312-listarch-gdb-patches=sources.redhat.com@sources.redhat.com>
Received: (qmail 1086 invoked by alias); 7 Mar 2005 16:55:10 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-patches-subscribe@sources.redhat.com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com
Received: (qmail 387 invoked from network); 7 Mar 2005 16:55:04 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO e34.co.us.ibm.com) (32.97.110.132)
  by sourceware.org with SMTP; 7 Mar 2005 16:55:04 -0000
Received: from westrelay02.boulder.ibm.com (westrelay02.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.195.11])
	by e34.co.us.ibm.com (8.12.10/8.12.9) with ESMTP id j27Gt3KN506738
	for <gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com>; Mon, 7 Mar 2005 11:55:03 -0500
Received: from d03av02.boulder.ibm.com (d03av02.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.195.168])
	by westrelay02.boulder.ibm.com (8.12.10/NCO/VER6.6) with ESMTP id j27Gt2L1135842
	for <gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com>; Mon, 7 Mar 2005 09:55:02 -0700
Received: from d03av02.boulder.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1])
	by d03av02.boulder.ibm.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id j27Gt250026574
	for <gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com>; Mon, 7 Mar 2005 09:55:02 -0700
Received: from austin.ibm.com (netmail2.austin.ibm.com [9.41.248.176])
	by d03av02.boulder.ibm.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id j27Gt2s9026543;
	Mon, 7 Mar 2005 09:55:02 -0700
Received: from lazy.austin.ibm.com (lazy.austin.ibm.com [9.53.94.97])
	by austin.ibm.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id j27Gt1fx030146;
	Mon, 7 Mar 2005 10:55:01 -0600
Date: Mon, 07 Mar 2005 16:55:00 -0000
From: Manoj Iyer <manjo@austin.ibm.com>
X-X-Sender: manjo@lazy
To: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org>
cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: [RFC] gdb.base/float.exp and gdb.base/commands.exp patch
In-Reply-To: <20050304162656.GA3334@nevyn.them.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0503071034530.15625@lazy>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0503021732360.3374@lazy> <20050303002718.GA4915@nevyn.them.org>
 <Pine.LNX.4.58.0503022307480.5029@lazy> <20050304162656.GA3334@nevyn.them.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
X-SW-Source: 2005-03/txt/msg00075.txt.bz2

>
> Accepting any line number is not OK.  Accepting this particular line
> number does seem plausible.  Can you do that instead?
>

If I change the current value of 57 to 82, the test will pass in powerpc
but fail on intel. Coz the generated line numbers on intel(57) and
PowerPC(82) are different.

> I've done it in the past.  It's not that hard to get ahold of one.
> But, as I said, I do not know what will be output.
> Might as well do this for now and fix it up later.
>

So, does that mean you accept the patch to float.exp? Or are we still
worried about ppc32 nofpu?