From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 12908 invoked by alias); 16 Sep 2002 19:05:45 -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 12898 invoked from network); 16 Sep 2002 19:05:44 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO localhost.redhat.com) (216.138.202.10) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 16 Sep 2002 19:05:44 -0000 Received: from ges.redhat.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F1C23D72; Mon, 16 Sep 2002 15:05:43 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <3D862B87.3020704@ges.redhat.com> Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2002 12:05:00 -0000 From: Andrew Cagney User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; NetBSD macppc; en-US; rv:1.0.0) Gecko/20020824 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Daniel Jacobowitz Cc: Fernando Nasser , Michael Elizabeth Chastain , gdb@sources.redhat.com, carlton@math.stanford.edu Subject: Re: Pinging Michael C References: <20020914045436.GA22119@nevyn.them.org> <3D85F0F3.5060108@redhat.com> <20020916150921.GA9184@nevyn.them.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2002-09/txt/msg00209.txt.bz2 >> I don't think we want to add tests to make gdb dump core to the >> testsuite right away. It should go in as soon as someone fixes the >> problem to prevent a regression. Alternatively we can add it in and >> explicitly skip the test with a explicit call to the kfail proc... > > > Fortunately, David has since fixed the bug. I think this patch is > ready to go in, once we agree on ChangeLog formatting. > > >> > http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb-patches/2002-08/msg00469.html >> > > >> >> I was talking to Andrew about collecting these regression tests into a >> single file (someone would eventually move them into one of the other >> files if the test can be associated with some feature). >> >> Andrew, what was the name of the file? I forgot... > > > I have an even better idea (I think :). I'll post an RFC for it in a > second. Fernando and I were discussing the idea of: gdb.base/gdb-bugs.exp (gdb.base/base-bugs.exp?) gdb.mi/mi-bugs.exp (just waiting :-) Andrew