From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-return-12494-listarch-gdb=sources.redhat.com@sources.redhat.com>
Received: (qmail 31808 invoked by alias); 17 Feb 2003 17:02:14 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-subscribe@sources.redhat.com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb@sources.redhat.com>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-help@sources.redhat.com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com
Received: (qmail 31799 invoked from network); 17 Feb 2003 17:02:14 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO duracef.shout.net) (204.253.184.12)
  by 172.16.49.205 with SMTP; 17 Feb 2003 17:02:14 -0000
Received: (from mec@localhost)
	by duracef.shout.net (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h1HH2CC12641;
	Mon, 17 Feb 2003 11:02:12 -0600
Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2003 17:02:00 -0000
From: Michael Elizabeth Chastain <mec@shout.net>
Message-Id: <200302171702.h1HH2CC12641@duracef.shout.net>
To: drow@mvista.com, gdb@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: gdb 5.3 versus gdb HEAD%200302015
X-SW-Source: 2003-02/txt/msg00267.txt.bz2

> If you use a setup_kfail, won't it start showing up as a KPASS for all
> of us with fixed GCCs?

Argh.  You are right.  I'll have to go with send_gdb/gdb_expect.
I've never done that in an MI context before.  Time to study the
mi_support.exp.

(I have an afternoon date so this is my last message until this evening).

Michael C