From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Geoff Keating To: ac131313@cygnus.com Cc: gcc-regression@gcc.gnu.org, gdb@sources.redhat.com, nathan@codesourcery.com Subject: Re: 1 GCC regressions, 1 new, with your patch on 2001-07-21T09:30:01Z. Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2001 22:11:00 -0000 Message-id: <200107240509.WAA02592@geoffk.org> References: <200107211225.f6LCPA730345@maat.cygnus.com> <200107211624.JAA01319@geoffk.org> <3B5C9BF0.3040304@cygnus.com> X-SW-Source: 2001-07/msg00334.html > Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2001 17:49:36 -0400 > From: Andrew Cagney > >> The new failures are: > >> native gdb.sum gdb.base/selftest.exp: > > > > > > This was interesting. After two months, the GCC tree has finally been > > stable for long enough for the tester to try to update its binutils > > tree. Unfortunately, this means it updates its _sources_, and it > > turns out that selftest.exp requires you keep around the old gdb > > sources so it can debug itself. > > > > Since selftest.exp doesn't really test the compiler at all, I have > > disabled it. > > > I'm not sure what you mean, > > As far as I know, selftest uses the just built native GDB to test the > just built native GDB. The test being skipped when the just built GDB > isn't native (it doesn't make sense). I think GCC should retain the > test since it is testing GDB against a very large program. There is no "just-built" gdb. GCC is tested against a known-working gdb, built with the system compiler. -- - Geoffrey Keating