Bug 27027 - FAIL: gdb.ada/mi_var_access.exp: Create varobj (unexpected output)
Summary: FAIL: gdb.ada/mi_var_access.exp: Create varobj (unexpected output)
Status: NEW
Alias: None
Product: gdb
Classification: Unclassified
Component: ada (show other bugs)
Version: HEAD
: P2 normal
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Not yet assigned to anyone
URL:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2020-12-07 12:41 UTC by Tom de Vries
Modified: 2022-02-28 20:51 UTC (History)
1 user (show)

See Also:
Host:
Target:
Build:
Last reconfirmed:

Attachments
Add an attachment (proposed patch, testcase, etc.)

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Tom de Vries 2020-12-07 12:41:13 UTC 
On openSUSE Tumbleweed (using gnatmake 10.2.1) I see:
...
FAIL: gdb.ada/mi_var_access.exp: Create varobj (unexpected output)
FAIL: gdb.ada/mi_var_access.exp: update at stop 2 (unexpected output)
...

In more detail:
...
(gdb) ^M
Expecting: ^(-var-create A_String_Access \* A_String_Access[^M
]+)?(\^done,name="A_String_Access",numchild="1",.*[^M
]+[(]gdb[)] ^M
[ ]*)
-var-create A_String_Access * A_String_Access^M
^done,name="A_String_Access",numchild="0",value="0x0",type="pck.string_access",thread-id="1",has_more="0"^M
(gdb) ^M
FAIL: gdb.ada/mi_var_access.exp: Create varobj (unexpected output)
...

Interestingly, on openSUSE Leap 15.2, when using the same gnatmake version, I don't see this FAIL.
Comment 1 Tom Tromey 2022-02-28 20:51:34 UTC 
This test is a little weird because I think it is accessing
uninitialized memory in the inferior.  So, I don't think the
results can be very reliable
I'm not sure if this also explains bug#28464 or not.