[PATCH v2 1/6] ld: Correct test pr19719 naming mix-up

[Jan Beulich]

On 21.03.2025 17:58, Jens Remus wrote:
> The suffix "defined/undefined" in the ld test pr19719 name specifies
> whether weak fun() is defined or undefined is mixed up.
> 
> The test builds an executable and a shared library. The latter in two
> flavors, one with weak fun() defined (libpr19719a.so, "defined") and
> one without weak fun() defined (libpr19719b.so, "undefined").
> 
> The first "Run $exe fun [...]" invocation uses libpr19719b.so as
> libpr19719.so, which is build from dummy.c, which does not define fun.
> Thus fun is undefined during this test run.
> 
> The second "Run $exe fun [...]" invocation uses libpr19719a.so as
> libpr19719.so, which is build from pr19719d.c, which does define fun.
> Thus fun is defined during this test run.
> 
> Correct the test naming mix-up accordingly.
> 
> ld/testsuite/
> 	* ld-elf/shared.exp (mix_pic_and_non_pic): Correct test naming
> 	mix-up of when weak fun is un-/defined.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jens Remus <jremus@linux.ibm.com>

Okay.

Jan