Re: [RFC] gdb.base/float.exp and gdb.base/commands.exp patch

[Manoj Iyer <manjo at austin dot ibm dot com>]

Daniel,

did u get a chance to reivew this patch?

Thanks
-----
manjo
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
+ Cogito ergo sum                                                          +
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

On Wed, 2 Mar 2005, Manoj Iyer wrote:

> > What compiler are you testing with?
>
> I am using GCC (gcc version 3.4.3 20041212 (Red Hat 3.4.3-9.EL4))
>
>
> > On what line is it reporting that
> > it has left the block?  I'd like to understand the difference before we
> > change this.
>
> I believe the line number is 82 in my case, and the testcase had 57.
>
> Ok here is the piece of output...
>
> --------------- paste -------------
> Continuing.^M
> Watchpoint 11: local_var^M
> ^M
> Old value = 0^M
> New value = 1^M
> factorial (value=1) at ./gdb.base/run.c:81^M
> 81          return (value);^M
> $38 = 1^M
> ^M
> Watchpoint 11 deleted because the program has left the block in^M
> which its expression is valid.^M
> 0x0000000010000604 in factorial (value=511) at ./gdb.base/run.c:82^M
> 82      }^M
> $39 = 511^M
> 1^M
> ^M
> Program exited normally.^M
> (gdb) FAIL: gdb.base/commands.exp: continue with watch
> ------------- end paste -------------------------
>
> > What about PowerPC targets which don't have an FPU?  Hmm, it looks like
> > GDB more or less assumes the FP is present.  Not sure about SPE though.
> >
>
> Yes I did think about ppc nofpu system, I believe they are mostly used in
> embedded devices, but I could be wrong. So what is the probability of
> coming accross one that someone will run this test on? But there should be
> a check in the testcase to invalidate the testcase if floating point is
> not present.(skip the test for no-fpu)
>
> Also, fileio.exp does some permission checks, ie read/write to a file
> which has no read/write permissions, but if you run as root the test will
> fail. There should be some mechanism by which the testcases should check
> if user id is root, if it is temporarily become another user like "nobody"
> or something like that. Couple of tests failed because of this, but I dont
> know how to handle this.
>
> --
> Manjo
>