From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 24715 invoked by alias); 1 Jan 2004 22:19:49 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 24312 invoked from network); 1 Jan 2004 22:19:45 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO nevyn.them.org) (66.93.172.17) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 1 Jan 2004 22:19:45 -0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 4.30 #1 (Debian)) id 1AcB9T-0003ba-LH; Thu, 01 Jan 2004 17:18:47 -0500 Date: Thu, 01 Jan 2004 22:19:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Michael Elizabeth Chastain Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com, kettenis@chello.nl Subject: Re: C++ testsuite changes Message-ID: <20040101221847.GA13833@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Michael Elizabeth Chastain , gdb@sources.redhat.com, kettenis@chello.nl References: <20040101221545.C2A754B35A@berman.michael-chastain.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20040101221545.C2A754B35A@berman.michael-chastain.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.1i X-SW-Source: 2004-01/txt/msg00018.txt.bz2 On Thu, Jan 01, 2004 at 05:15:45PM -0500, Michael Chastain wrote: > drow> Can you identify what expect feature was causing the problem? I'm > drow> quite curious. > > I'm working on it. Something like this is happening: > > virtfunc.exp calls gdb_test_multiple > gdb_test_multiple gets the "eof" case > virtfunc.exp calls gdb_test_multiple with nearly the same pattern > gdb_test_multiple gets the "eof" case > virtfunc.exp calls gdb_test_multiple with nearly the same pattern > gdb_test_multiple gets the "eof" case > virtfunc.exp calls gdb_test_multiple with nearly the same pattern > gdb_test_multiple gets the "eof" case > virtfunc.exp calls gdb_test_multiple with a different pattern > gdb_test_multiple recovers and gets normal output! > > I'll try futzing with the problem pattern and see if that makes the > problem go away. > > drow> I suspect we need to do an expect update... > > Well, tcl 8.4.5 + expect 5.3.9 + dejagnu 1.4.3 works fine on > hppa2.0w-hp-hpux11.11 (as well as i686-pc-linux-gnu of course). > > What would it take to do an expect update? In particular, what is the > list of hosts that have to be tested with a new version of 'expect' > in order to do an expect update? I haven't the faintest idea. But I think it may be better to simply do the update and deal with the consequences. The real question is, does anything other than dejagnu use the in-tree expect? -- Daniel Jacobowitz MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer