Re: [RFA]: Fix jmain.exp to xfail for break at main

[mec dot gnu at mindspring dot com (Michael Elizabeth Chastain)]

jj> Currently, the gdb.java/jmain.exp test has hard-coded line 6 as the
jj> expected line number for a break at jmain.main (java.lang.String[]).
jj> This occurs for gcc 3.3 and is incorrect.  Line 6 is the end brace for
jj> the main routine.  As of gcc 3.4, the line number is reported to be line
jj> 4.  This also isn't what gdb wants as this points to the open brace.
jj> The desired result is that we point to line 5 which is the first line in
jj> main (return statement).  That said, I have changed the expected line to
jj> be 5 and set the test as an XFAIL.

Dunno what Andrew will say about this patch but I don't think it's good.

XFAIL means 'external fail'.  If you add an XFAIL to the test suite, I
want to see more analysis about what the bug is -- the best thing is an
actual gcc PR number.  In the gcc PR is a copy of jmain.java and the
assembly language output and an explanation of why the assembly language
output is incorrect.

What does gcc HEAD do?

If gcc HEAD actually gives line 5, then I would do this in the test
script:

  # gcc HEAD 2004-07-05 marks the first line as 5, which is correct.
  # gcc 3.3.4 -gdwarf-2 marks the first line as line 6.
  # gcc 3.4.1 -gdwarf-2 marks the first line as line 4.
  set bpmain "Breakpoint .* file .*jmain.java, line 5\."

If gcc HEAD gives some other line, then I think you need to file
a PR against gcc.  It may be low priority and not fixed for years,
in which case you can XFAIL the test with that PR number.

Michael C

===

2004-07-07  Jeff Johnston  <jjohnstn@redhat.com>

         * gdb.java/jmain.exp: Fix expected line number for main to
         break at.  Set XFAIL for break at main test since gcj does not
         provide line number info for first statement in main.