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: Remove code handling old ARM aliases from GDB


On Thu, 5 May 2011, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:

> Splitting of hairs, choice of words.  I guess we have to
> disagree on the words, but I'm sure we can agree that running
> the tests does exit with an error after, but didn't before your
> changes.

sim tests on their own, yes - I just consider this to be an *improvement* 
(better testsuite coverage, exit status more accurately reflecting the 
existence of defects).  I think of sim as part of GDB, and I've never seen 
the gdb testsuite anywhere near to having completely clean results for any 
target.

> As having introduced this, you're on the hook to investigate and
> rectify.

I'm not expert on GDB policies.  Where is this documented and would this 
apply to the case I described of tests for complex numbers ABI handling, 
which I consider exactly analogous?  I don't believe this would apply 
under GCC practice, as it's not a regression but (effectively) a new test.

-- 
Joseph S. Myers
joseph@codesourcery.com


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