From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 18316 invoked by alias); 13 Jan 2011 21:27:22 -0000 Received: (qmail 18302 invoked by uid 22791); 13 Jan 2011 21:27:21 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from rock.gnat.com (HELO rock.gnat.com) (205.232.38.15) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Thu, 13 Jan 2011 21:27:15 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 05D182BAC43; Thu, 13 Jan 2011 16:27:14 -0500 (EST) Received: from rock.gnat.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rock.gnat.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id rYE9qAXGzRTT; Thu, 13 Jan 2011 16:27:13 -0500 (EST) Received: from joel.gnat.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7AD982BAC40; Thu, 13 Jan 2011 16:27:13 -0500 (EST) Received: by joel.gnat.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id B4BF11459AD; Thu, 13 Jan 2011 16:27:12 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2011 21:27:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: Michael Snyder Cc: Nathan Froyd , "gdb@sourceware.org" Subject: Re: Question re: testsuite, "isnative", "is_remote" etc. Message-ID: <20110113212712.GQ2518@adacore.com> References: <4D2E35C5.60206@vmware.com> <20110113184025.GO6247@codesourcery.com> <4D2F4CA9.1010105@vmware.com> <20110113193211.GO2518@adacore.com> <4D2F5881.4020703@vmware.com> <20110113205311.GP2518@adacore.com> <4D2F67A5.20000@vmware.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4D2F67A5.20000@vmware.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2011-01/txt/msg00052.txt.bz2 > The thing is, the situation is the same as now. We either have to > put "isremote" in our board file (as now), or replace it by putting > "use_gdb_stub" in our board file. > > A lot of changed tests for, as I see it, no benefit. The entire testsuite is a mess, if you ask me. It's understandable: there was a lot to learn along the way, and also we are trying to pay more attention and understand what we're doing (not all that long ago, I was just as happy to copy-paste some code and tweak it hapzardly until it "worked"). We're also trying to simplify things, so I think we headed in the right direction (if we assume that the goal is to stick with dejagnu, which seems the only reasonable option as of today). We don't have to fix the whole thing, particularly on the advice of someone like me, who really barely knows what he's talking about. But we can try to establish a standard, and see where that leads us. If we don't find problems after a while, we know the decision was good, and we can then consider making a massive change (or we can just leave everything as they are). -- Joel