From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-patches-return-61774-listarch-gdb-patches=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 9635 invoked by alias); 19 Feb 2009 01:00:38 -0000
Received: (qmail 9623 invoked by uid 22791); 19 Feb 2009 01:00:37 -0000
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.0 required=5.0 	tests=AWL,BAYES_00,J_CHICKENPOX_63,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from mx2.redhat.com (HELO mx2.redhat.com) (66.187.237.31)     by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Thu, 19 Feb 2009 01:00:28 +0000
Received: from int-mx2.corp.redhat.com (int-mx2.corp.redhat.com [172.16.27.26]) 	by mx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n1J10ITc029893; 	Wed, 18 Feb 2009 20:00:18 -0500
Received: from ns3.rdu.redhat.com (ns3.rdu.redhat.com [10.11.255.199]) 	by int-mx2.corp.redhat.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id n1J10Inb022703; 	Wed, 18 Feb 2009 20:00:18 -0500
Received: from opsy.redhat.com (vpn-13-158.rdu.redhat.com [10.11.13.158]) 	by ns3.rdu.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n1J10FJr011177; 	Wed, 18 Feb 2009 20:00:16 -0500
Received: by opsy.redhat.com (Postfix, from userid 500) 	id B2BFA37824C; Wed, 18 Feb 2009 18:00:14 -0700 (MST)
To: "Pierre Muller" <muller@ics.u-strasbg.fr>
Cc: "'Daniel Jacobowitz'" <drow@false.org>, <gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
Subject: Re: [PING] [RFC-v2] Use untested for macscp.exp if no macro information 	generated
References: <011801c92a03$4b71afa0$e2550ee0$@u-strasbg.fr> 	<m38wsxvin8.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> 	<001401c92af1$cf8821e0$6e9865a0$@u-strasbg.fr> 	<004a01c97f96$637bced0$2a736c70$@u-strasbg.fr> 	<000001c9814b$919b63a0$b4d22ae0$@u-strasbg.fr> 	<20090201182834.GE4597@caradoc.them.org> 	<000801c9860c$d5dc8ba0$8195a2e0$@u-strasbg.fr> 	<000001c9921b$cf82d500$6e887f00$@u-strasbg.fr>
From: Tom Tromey <tromey@redhat.com>
Reply-To: tromey@redhat.com
Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2009 08:20:00 -0000
In-Reply-To: <000001c9921b$cf82d500$6e887f00$@u-strasbg.fr> (Pierre Muller's message of "Wed\, 18 Feb 2009 23\:54\:08 +0100")
Message-ID: <m3d4dfz1ep.fsf@fleche.redhat.com>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.2 (gnu/linux)
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: <gdb-patches.sourceware.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-patches-subscribe@sourceware.org>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org
X-SW-Source: 2009-02/txt/msg00393.txt.bz2

>>>>> "Pierre" == Pierre Muller <muller@ics.u-strasbg.fr> writes:

Pierre> I didn't get any feedback on this one.

Sorry about that.

Pierre> Should I resend it as a RFA?

No need :)

>> FAIL: gdb.base/macscp.exp: info macro WHERE after `list main'
>> (undefined)

It seems to me that it should be possible to check some macro
expansion without running a "test", and thus not having any FAILs show
up in the log.

Is this too hard?

E.g., I was thinking, send "macro expand FIFTY_SEVEN", and if you
don't get "= 57" back, call untested and return.

Tom