This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [patch/rfc] Rewrite "structs" testcase
- From: Andrew Cagney <ac131313 at redhat dot com>
- To: Michael Elizabeth Chastain <mec at shout dot net>
- Cc: gdb-patches at sources dot redhat dot com
- Date: Thu, 06 Nov 2003 13:49:16 -0500
- Subject: Re: [patch/rfc] Rewrite "structs" testcase
- References: <200311061733.hA6HXSWA004161@duracef.shout.net>
I'm concerned about the use of "long long" in a test program.
What if someone uses a non-gcc Ansi C compiler?
But this doesn't look any worse than other tests, so okay.
In structs.exp, line 22:
# This file was written by Jeff Law. (law@cygnus.com)
Add something like:
# And rewritten by Andrew Cagney (cagney@redhat.com)
I'll just drop that.
I got a lot of FAILS with the new tests.
native i686-pc-linux-gnu, gdb HEAD, binutils 2.14.
PASS FAIL
gcc 2.95.3 -gdwarf-2 1086 138
gcc 2.95.3 -gstabs+ 1122 102
gcc 3.3.2 -gdwarf-2 1122 102
gcc 3.3.2 -gstabs+ 1122 102
I have put up a tarball:
ftp://ftp.shout.net/pub/users/mec/gdb/2003-11-06-2.tar.gz
There are a lot of duplicate test names too. It would be good
to uniquify them.
Yes, working on it. I can't see a way to fix things like "run_to_main"
though.
Not proofread yet because of so many FAIL results.
Looks like two problems:
(gdb) ptype foo1.a
type = tld
(gdb) FAIL: gdb.base/structs.exp: ptype foo1.a for 1tld
Some debug info prints "long double", some prints "tld". I've changed
whats printed to hopefully be something more robust ...
(gdb) FAIL: gdb.base/structs.exp: ptype foo1.a for 1tld
p/c fun1()
$1 = {a = 0x08044004c400000000000000}
Seems GDB and GCC disagree over how the i386 returns floating-point
values. My "this will always work" test has found a bug in GDB - cool.
Note that the tests do all pass for PPC.
I've also trimmed back the number of tests so that they are more focused.
I'll post a revision later today.
thanks,
Andrew