From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@mvista.com>
To: Michael Elizabeth Chastain <mec.gnu@mindspring.com>
Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com, kettenis@chello.nl
Subject: Re: C++ testsuite changes
Date: Thu, 01 Jan 2004 21:35:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20040101213504.GA12798@nevyn.them.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20040101212247.6D18E4B35A@berman.michael-chastain.com>
On Thu, Jan 01, 2004 at 04:22:47PM -0500, Michael Chastain wrote:
> > I would really prefer it if you didn't rewrite the tests to accomodate
> > the ABI change (a very specific change) and change all sorts of other
> > tests at the same time. It makes it impossible to tell from your
> > patches when you make a change like this one.
>
> Sigh, you're right. I should have done this in several stages,
> where the first stage is lot of gdb_test_multiple with no change
> in output.
>
> I can go back and make it that way if you want. Shall I do that?
At this point I don't think it's worth it. For the remaining testcases
perhaps?
> > Eh... why don't you? It's a feature that we don't print the virtual
> > base pointer in recent gcc/dwarf combinations.
>
> Of course it's acceptable if gdb does *not* print the virtual base
> pointer.
>
> If gdb *does* print a virtual base pointer, do we consider that a
> bug in gcc? Because that's what "XFAIL" means. Or is it a bug in gdb?
> Then I should file a PR for it.
>
> My opinion is that we should just accept it. There's far worse bugs
> in C++ support that aren't getting any attention.
It's a bug in GDB.
I'm currently working on the C++ PRs. Unfortunately the one at the top
of my list also triggers a GCC bug. So it is taking time.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-01-01 21:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-01-01 21:23 Michael Elizabeth Chastain
2004-01-01 21:35 ` Daniel Jacobowitz [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2004-01-01 23:07 Michael Elizabeth Chastain
2004-01-01 22:41 Michael Elizabeth Chastain
2004-01-01 23:02 ` Mark Kettenis
2004-01-01 22:16 Michael Elizabeth Chastain
2004-01-01 22:19 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2004-01-01 21:41 Michael Elizabeth Chastain
2004-01-01 21:47 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2004-01-01 20:05 Michael Elizabeth Chastain
2004-01-01 21:08 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2004-01-01 14:26 Mark Kettenis
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20040101213504.GA12798@nevyn.them.org \
--to=drow@mvista.com \
--cc=gdb@sources.redhat.com \
--cc=kettenis@chello.nl \
--cc=mec.gnu@mindspring.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox