This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [patch/rfc] Remove all setup_xfail's from testsuite/gdb.mi/
- From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow at mvista dot com>
- To: gdb-patches at sources dot redhat dot com
- Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 15:11:58 -0500
- Subject: Re: [patch/rfc] Remove all setup_xfail's from testsuite/gdb.mi/
- References: <200301162006.h0GK65K18945@duracef.shout.net>
On Thu, Jan 16, 2003 at 02:06:05PM -0600, Michael Elizabeth Chastain wrote:
> My two cents ...
> Daniel J suggests that we keep making improvements:
> > XFAIL->KFAIL
> > random XFAIL->analyzed XFAIL
> > XFAIL->PASS
> The problem is that, in the source code, "setup_xfail" looks the same
> for both our crap legacy XFAIL's and the nice new analyzed xfail's.
> Perhaps a little mechanism like "gdb_mark_external_fail" would help.
> Then "grep xfail" would find only the shrinking pool of old stuff.
I was going to mark individual files, but the concept is the same...
then we can kill the markers when we're done.
> > This I definitely like. "Cantfix"?
> I propose "external".
> I find "cantfix" to be a bit arrogant and a bit negative. And it doesn't
> distinguish between "I can't fix this because I don't have the resources"
> versus "I can't fix this because I can show you that binutils is feeding
> gdb incorrect / incomplete information".
I like "external".
MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer