From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 16070 invoked by alias); 12 Jun 2003 12:07:46 -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 16059 invoked from network); 12 Jun 2003 12:07:45 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO localhost.redhat.com) (24.157.166.107) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 12 Jun 2003 12:07:45 -0000 Received: from redhat.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E7E392B63; Thu, 12 Jun 2003 08:07:43 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <3EE86D0F.8070409@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2003 12:07:00 -0000 From: Andrew Cagney User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; NetBSD macppc; en-US; rv:1.0.2) Gecko/20030223 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gdb@sources.redhat.com, Corinna Vinschen Subject: Re: failures in fileio.exp References: <20030612095036.GP30116@cygbert.vinschen.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2003-06/txt/msg00198.txt.bz2 > On Wed, Jun 11, 2003 at 03:30:14PM -0700, David Carlton wrote: > >> I'm seeing these failures in fileio.exp: >> >> FAIL: gdb.base/fileio.exp: Stat a NULL pathname returns ENOENT >> FAIL: gdb.base/fileio.exp: System with invalid command returns 127 >> FAIL: gdb.base/fileio.exp: Renaming a nonexistant file returns ENOENT >> FAIL: gdb.base/fileio.exp: Unlinking a nonexistant file returns ENOENT >> FAIL: gdb.base/fileio.exp: Time(2) returns feasible values >> >> This is on Red Hat 8.0 (i686-pc-linux-gnu), GCC 3.1. I'll include the >> gdb.log below, if it helps. > > > Fileio.exp only works for remote targets and then only for targets on > which the fileio protocol is implemented. I've added a conditional > which only runs the test on remote targets. My understanding from the thread discussing fileio.exp: http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb-patches/2003-06/msg00410.html was that it should work native. Restricting it to the remote case would leave it open to bit rot. The above indicate that this is true. The differences are minor syscall nuances and can be handled with a bit of testsuite tweaking. Andrew