[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