From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 27398 invoked by alias); 5 May 2011 23:19:07 -0000 Received: (qmail 27389 invoked by uid 22791); 5 May 2011 23:19:07 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail.codesourcery.com (HELO mail.codesourcery.com) (38.113.113.100) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Thu, 05 May 2011 23:18:53 +0000 Received: (qmail 1522 invoked from network); 5 May 2011 23:18:53 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO digraph.polyomino.org.uk) (joseph@127.0.0.2) by mail.codesourcery.com with ESMTPA; 5 May 2011 23:18:53 -0000 Received: from jsm28 (helo=localhost) by digraph.polyomino.org.uk with local-esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1QI7op-0006PC-V5; Thu, 05 May 2011 23:18:51 +0000 Date: Thu, 05 May 2011 23:19:00 -0000 From: "Joseph S. Myers" To: Hans-Peter Nilsson cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: Remove code handling old ARM aliases from GDB In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII 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: 2011-05/txt/msg00165.txt.bz2 On Thu, 5 May 2011, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote: > Splitting of hairs, choice of words. I guess we have to > disagree on the words, but I'm sure we can agree that running > the tests does exit with an error after, but didn't before your > changes. sim tests on their own, yes - I just consider this to be an *improvement* (better testsuite coverage, exit status more accurately reflecting the existence of defects). I think of sim as part of GDB, and I've never seen the gdb testsuite anywhere near to having completely clean results for any target. > As having introduced this, you're on the hook to investigate and > rectify. I'm not expert on GDB policies. Where is this documented and would this apply to the case I described of tests for complex numbers ABI handling, which I consider exactly analogous? I don't believe this would apply under GCC practice, as it's not a regression but (effectively) a new test. -- Joseph S. Myers joseph@codesourcery.com