This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [rfa/testsuite/mi] Recognize a few incorrect outputs
- To: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow at mvista dot com>, fnasser at cygnus dot com
- Subject: Re: [rfa/testsuite/mi] Recognize a few incorrect outputs
- From: Andrew Cagney <ac131313 at cygnus dot com>
- Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2001 16:34:03 -0400
- Cc: gdb-patches at sources dot redhat dot com
- References: <20010928151616.A14106@nevyn.them.org>
> <gripe>
> A lot of GDB tests seem to be written with only pass and timeout
> alternatives, or only with overly-specialized fails. The hypocrite-alert
> readers of this message will note that I'm guilty of the same thing; this is
> Just Enough to make them catch a few errors I could think of, not enough to
> recognize completely wrong output. Someday, someone more motivated than I
> should clean this up.
> </gripe>
For the MI, this is a pretty obvious fix. I've been doing the same
thing my self (when I noticed it). One suggestion, can you make that
fail expression less strict so that it picks. Something like:
<correct-output> (gdb) <more-output> (gdb)
pass
.* (gdb) .* (gdb)
fail
timeout
fail
alternatively (hmm, better?), keep the expression as you have it but add
a comment in paren vis:
fail "continue to incr_a (compiler bug info is wrong)"
Fernando,
Given the compiler debug info is ``wrong'' would this even qualify for
as an xfail?
Andrew