From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Matt Schalit <mschalit@pacbell.net>
To: gdb@sourceware.cygnus.com
Subject: Re: GDB 5.0 testsuite failures
Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2001 18:58:00 -0000
Message-id: <3A8750C1.7B6D486C@pacbell.net>
References: <200102110638.WAA17322@bosch.cygnus.com>
X-SW-Source: 2001-02/msg00116.html

Michael Elizabeth Chastain wrote:
> 
> Hi Matthew,
> 
> Thanks for posting this.  I appreciate seeing gdb test results from diverse
> architectures.


Thanks for the quick reply.  After this, is it proper to
post a gbd backtrace here and ask for help?  
It's only 11 lines.

 
> Summary: this gdb looks healthy to me.   There is one major bug:
> if the user uses gdb to call a function in the target program, and that
> function has floating point parameters or a floating point return value,
> the call will not work.




If that bug doesn't occur when I do the following,
then I'm safe:

 (gdb) file /usr/local/bin/gnomecc
 (gdb) run
 (gdb) bt





> There are probably some more minor bugs but I can't tell from the gdb.sum
> file.
> 
> BTW, please note that the test run produces a "gdb.sum" file and a "gdb.log"
> file.  The "gdb.log" file has a lot more information and it's a better file
> to put up for ftp, rather than capturing the output of "make check".


  ftp://63.194.213.179:710/pub/Random/gdb.log



 
> Michael Elizabeth Chastain
> <chastain@redhat.com>
> "love without fear"
> 
>   ERROR: 26
> 
>     23 errors in gdb.stabs/weird.exp
>       These look harmless; your assembler does not like .stabs directives.
> 
>     3 errors from 'make' at the end of the run
>       More fluff.
> 
>   WARNING: 3
> 
>     1 warning in gdb.base/corefile.exp
>       'can't generate a core file' -- does not look like a gdb problem
> 
>     2 warnings in gdb.stabs/weird.exp
>       Yeah, we know it doesn't like stabs.
> 
>   FAIL: 224
> 
>     190 fails in gdb.stabs/weird.exp
>       Will this test case shut up already?!
> 
>     7 fails in gdb.base/callfwmall.exp
>       These are all related to calling functions with floating point
>       parameters or floating point return values.  This looks like a
>       real bug in gdb.
> 
>     7 fails in gdb.base/callfuncs.exp
>       These are all related to calling functions with floating point
>       parameters or floating point return values.  This looks like a
>       real bug in gdb.
> 
>     5 fails in gdb.c++/ovldbreak.exp
>       I would need to see gdb.log to tell whether this is a real bug or not.
> 
>     3 fails in gdb.threads/pthreads.exp
>       Compiler can't find pthreads library so all these tests fail.



When I throw -pthreads as a LIBS during the build of an app,
it gets added to all the other -lm -lgen -socket -lnsl libs.
But that's the special compiler flag for gcc.  I do have these:

/usr/lib/libthread.so.1
/usr/lib/libthreadT.so.1
/usr/lib/libthread.so
/usr/lib/libthreadT.so





 
>     2 fails in gdb.base/commands.exp
>       One of these is a known bug in the test script (gnats gdb/14).
>       The other looks like a bug in gdb.
> 
>     2 fails in gdb.base/break.exp
>       I don't know anything about these failures.
> 
>     1 fail  in gdb.base/varargs.exp
>       This is another call-to-function with floating point parameters.
> 
>     1 fail  in gdb.base/signals.exp
>       This is marked as 'known SV4 bug'.  It may mean that 'next' will
>       not work on your machine and we can't fix it.
> 
>     1 fail  in gdb.base/selftest.exp
>       I don't know anything about this failure.
> 
>     1 fail  in gdb.base/interrupt.exp
>       I don't know anything about this failure.
> 
>     1 fail  in gdb.base/annota1.exp
>       I don't know anything about this failure.


Ok.  Thanks again,
Matthew