From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 16055 invoked by alias); 5 Feb 2003 21:38:28 -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 15954 invoked from network); 5 Feb 2003 21:38:27 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO zenia.red-bean.com) (66.244.67.22) by 172.16.49.205 with SMTP; 5 Feb 2003 21:38:27 -0000 Received: from zenia.red-bean.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by zenia.red-bean.com (8.12.5/8.12.5) with ESMTP id h15LTG8A029109; Wed, 5 Feb 2003 16:29:17 -0500 Received: (from jimb@localhost) by zenia.red-bean.com (8.12.5/8.12.5/Submit) id h15LTE6X029074; Wed, 5 Feb 2003 16:29:14 -0500 To: Michael Elizabeth Chastain Cc: carlton@math.stanford.edu, fnasser@redhat.com, gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: Clean up gdb.c++ tests for dwarf 1 References: <200302052130.h15LUHB10715@duracef.shout.net> From: Jim Blandy Date: Wed, 05 Feb 2003 21:38:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <200302052130.h15LUHB10715@duracef.shout.net> Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.2.92 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-SW-Source: 2003-02/txt/msg00112.txt.bz2 Michael Elizabeth Chastain writes: > gdb HEAD%20030205 has loads of this stuff in the C++ test suite: > > setup_xfail_format "DWARF 1" > > There are 81 instances of this. > > Some test scripts have them, and some don't. I'd like to get rid > of them and replace them with something more coherent -- or nothing. > > I see four choices. > > (1) Just remove these calls to setup_xfail_format. If someone runs the > gdb test suite with DWARF 1, the test suite will do its job and give > FAIL results for all the C++ tests that do not work with DWARF 1. Your rationale here is that, since we don't really know which of these failures are genuine, can't-be-done-with-Dwarf-1 expected failures, and which are GDB bugs, you want to dump them all into the "genuine bug" category and start re-categorizing, using our modern interpretation of XFAIL and KFAIL?