From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 19739 invoked by alias); 22 Apr 2004 07:33:44 -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 19730 invoked from network); 22 Apr 2004 07:33:43 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 22 Apr 2004 07:33:43 -0000 Received: from int-mx2.corp.redhat.com (int-mx2.corp.redhat.com [172.16.27.26]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i3M7XgFe029847 for ; Thu, 22 Apr 2004 03:33:42 -0400 Received: from potter.sfbay.redhat.com (potter.sfbay.redhat.com [172.16.27.15]) by int-mx2.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id i3M7Xfw12399 for ; Thu, 22 Apr 2004 03:33:41 -0400 Received: from cygbert.vinschen.de (vpn50-45.rdu.redhat.com [172.16.50.45]) by potter.sfbay.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id i3M7XeC01537 for ; Thu, 22 Apr 2004 00:33:40 -0700 Received: by cygbert.vinschen.de (Postfix, from userid 500) id A1A625811D; Thu, 22 Apr 2004 09:33:34 +0200 (CEST) Date: Thu, 22 Apr 2004 08:07:00 -0000 From: Corinna Vinschen To: gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: Question about args.exp test Message-ID: <20040422073334.GC1486@cygbert.vinschen.de> Reply-To: gdb@sources.redhat.com Mail-Followup-To: gdb@sources.redhat.com References: <20040421164040.GS1307@cygbert.vinschen.de> <20040421184448.GB5956@nevyn.them.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20040421184448.GB5956@nevyn.them.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2i X-RedHat-Spam-Score: 0 X-SW-Source: 2004-04/txt/msg00129.txt.bz2 On Apr 21 14:44, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > On Wed, Apr 21, 2004 at 06:40:40PM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote: > > Why is args.exp expecting two apostrophes and who's supposed to add them? > > The args testapplication apparently isn't. > > IIRC, the comments are wrong. The tests can not be fixed for the ARM > simulator, though - I spent several days trying. Trace the path that > argv takes through from the GDB prompt to the inferior main(), if you > want some gruesome entertainment: > - it is word split by GDB before invoking the sim > - it is reconstructed into a string by the sim/RDI interface > - it is word split again in either newlib or libgloss, in handwritten > assembly > > The interface simply does not permit properly quoted arguments. Uh, that explains it. Thanks for the description, Corinna