[ob] Eliminate another gdb_suppress_entire_file

Daniel Jacobowitz drow@false.org
Fri Jun 23 12:34:00 GMT 2006


On Thu, Jun 22, 2006 at 09:03:52PM -0700, Joel Brobecker wrote:
> > I've been using untested followed by return.  Why wouldn't that be
> > ideal?
> 
> It's actually pretty good. I think in some cases unsupported might
> be a better choice, but I like untested too, because it's always
> going to be true...
> 
> I see in your patch that you used the name of the .exp file as
> the argument of untested. Should we do that, or should we try
> to preserve the string we previously used with gdb_suppress_entire_file?

Really, I don't think it matters :-)

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery



More information about the Gdb-patches mailing list