This is the mail archive of the gdb-patches@sourceware.org mailing list for the GDB project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: Regression on gdb.ada/null_array.exp [Re: [patch] DW_AT_byte_size for array type entries]

> > I don't think we can restore the original (lucky) behavior without
> > breaking the intent of Ken's patch.
> 
> OK, so could you XFAIL it? <=gcc-4.4 or the missing ___XA type are both fine
> IMO.  I will do it otherwise.

I would do it, normally, but I think it's easier if you do it, because
I would not be able to test the XFAIL case.

> > > BTW local FSF GCC 4.4.x rebuild should also make it IMO reproducible.
> > 
> > Do the most recent compilers trigger the regresions as well?
> 
> No.

That's good news. Things will get even better as soon as the
descriptive-type patch gets in GCC.

-- 
Joel
Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]