Re: [patch] core file inserted breakpoints

[Mark Wielaard <mark at klomp dot org>]

Hi Phil,

On Mon, 2007-07-16 at 10:45 -0500, Phil Muldoon wrote:
> Mark Wielaard wrote:
> > As it happens they don't and the test PASSes (x86_64/FC6). This is
> > because fcore currently writes out the elf sections as it can find them
> > on disk. Phil and me decided it wouldn't hurt to add the testcase anyway
> > in case the sendrecMaps() code in core gets rewritten. Then this can be
> > a valuable testcase to show no regressions slip in.
>
> Quick question: Does this pass on x86?

Yes!

$ uname -a
Linux hermans.wildebeest.org 2.6.21-1.3228.fc7 #1 SMP Tue Jun 12 15:37:31 EDT 2007 i686 i686 i386 GNU/Linux
$ ./TestRunner frysk.proc.dead.TestLinuxCore
Running testLinuxCoreFileMaps(frysk.proc.dead.TestLinuxCore) ...PASS
Running testLinuxCoreFileStackTrace(frysk.proc.dead.TestLinuxCore) ...PASS
Running testLinuxHostPopulation(frysk.proc.dead.TestLinuxCore) ...PASS
Running testLinuxProcPopulation(frysk.proc.dead.TestLinuxCore) ...PASS
Running testLinuxProcAuxV(frysk.proc.dead.TestLinuxCore) ...PASS
Running testLinuxTaskMemory(frysk.proc.dead.TestLinuxCore) ...PASS
Running testLinuxTaskPopulation(frysk.proc.dead.TestLinuxCore) ...PASS
Running testInsertedBreakpoint(frysk.proc.dead.TestLinuxCore) ...PASS

Time: 0.468

OK (8 tests)

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part