From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 11639 invoked by alias); 1 Mar 2008 22:21:20 -0000 Received: (qmail 11628 invoked by uid 22791); 1 Mar 2008 22:21:20 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from viper.snap.net.nz (HELO viper.snap.net.nz) (202.37.101.8) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Sat, 01 Mar 2008 22:20:51 +0000 Received: from kahikatea.snap.net.nz (178.63.255.123.dynamic.snap.net.nz [123.255.63.178]) by viper.snap.net.nz (Postfix) with ESMTP id 10F283DA9CC; Sun, 2 Mar 2008 11:20:48 +1300 (NZDT) Received: by kahikatea.snap.net.nz (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 084058FC6D; Sun, 2 Mar 2008 11:20:46 +1300 (NZDT) From: Nick Roberts MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <18377.54973.885633.998260@kahikatea.snap.net.nz> Date: Sat, 01 Mar 2008 22:21:00 -0000 To: Eli Zaretskii Cc: gdb@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] GDB 6.8 release process created! In-Reply-To: References: X-Mailer: VM 7.19 under Emacs 23.0.60.27 X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2008-03/txt/msg00009.txt.bz2 > It builds okay, and yields the results below for "make check": > > === gdb Summary === > > # of expected passes 11833 > # of unexpected failures 73 > # of unexpected successes 2 > # of expected failures 43 > # of known failures 39 > # of untested testcases 10 > # of unsupported tests 49 > > If someone wants to know details about some specific test cases, I > have the data available, just holler. That seems like a lot of failures. Are any of these the ones Vladimir pointed out?: FAIL: gdb.base/annota1.exp: continue to printf FAIL: gdb.base/annota1.exp: send SIGUSR1 FAIL: gdb.base/annota1.exp: signal sent FAIL: gdb.cp/annota2.exp: continue to exit FAIL: gdb.cp/annota2.exp: watch triggered on a.x He says: > JFYI -- I'm not sure we should bother about annotations. If that's to wind me up - that's fine, I probably can't expect any more, but I hope it's not GDB policy. In this particular case, it's not a problem because Emacs doesn't use frames-invalid annotations - but it does use others. -- Nick http://www.inet.net.nz/~nickrob