From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 12378 invoked by alias); 3 Jan 2003 22:27:03 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 12365 invoked from network); 3 Jan 2003 22:27:02 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO jackfruit.Stanford.EDU) (171.64.38.136) by 209.249.29.67 with SMTP; 3 Jan 2003 22:27:02 -0000 Received: (from carlton@localhost) by jackfruit.Stanford.EDU (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h03MQnF31837; Fri, 3 Jan 2003 14:26:49 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: jackfruit.Stanford.EDU: carlton set sender to carlton@math.stanford.edu using -f To: Michael Elizabeth Chastain Cc: drow@mvista.com, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: [patch/rfc] KFAIL gdb.c++/annota2.exp watch triggered on a.x References: <200301032212.h03MCQa20253@duracef.shout.net> From: David Carlton Date: Fri, 03 Jan 2003 22:27:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <200301032212.h03MCQa20253@duracef.shout.net> Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.0808 (Gnus v5.8.8) XEmacs/21.4 (Common Lisp) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-SW-Source: 2003-01/txt/msg00106.txt.bz2 On Fri, 3 Jan 2003 16:12:26 -0600, Michael Elizabeth Chastain said: > One advantage of David's code is that when the bug gets fixed, > people see a more informative message for a while: "KPASS gdb/38" > rather than "PASS". Actually, I don't consider that an advantage at all: any KPASS seems to me to demand an investigation, and should be eradicated. So, when somebody fixes this bug, I think that somebody should change the KPASSes to plain old normal PASSes. (As well as remove or comment out the KFAIL branches, as I said in my response to Daniel that crossed your e-mail.) Basically, I see three different priorites of output messages (I'm ignoring ERROR/UNSUPPORTED/etc. for now): 1) PASS: everything is peachy keen. 2) KFAIL/XFAIL: something doesn't work right, but at least we know that it doesn't work right. 3) FAIL/KPASS/XPASS: either something doesn't work right that we weren't aware of, or something does work right when we think it shouldn't. And, in the mythical utopia where the GDB testsuite has been carefully audited to have KFAILs added where appropriate, messages in category 3 are grounds for immediate investigation, whereas messages in categories 1 and 2 aren't grounds for immediate investigation. So, when bugs have been fixed, I don't want to see KPASS (because that gives the misleading impression that we think it hasn't been fixed) or KFAIL (because that gives the misleading impression that we're aware that the bug hasn't, in fact, been fixed after all). David Carlton carlton@math.stanford.edu