Attached is a test case for it -- it will have a number of
XFAILS without this patch, which will become PASSES with the patch.
I looked at the testcase, and noticed a couple of things:
# Copyright 1995, 1996, 1997, 1999, 2007, 2008, 2009
I was surprised by the copyright years, but I then read the contents
of the testcase that mentions alpha-osf3. That's when I realized
that this file is inspired by sigall.exp... I supposed that this
was the right thing to do, although it probably does not matter
because I believe that these headers are actually not legally
significant.
if [target_info exists gdb,nosignals] {
verbose "Skipping sigall-reverse.exp because of nosignals."
continue
}
I wonder why we do a continue here, whereas we do a return elsewhere:
if ![target_info exists gdb,can_reverse] {
return
}
I wish we had a cookbook for writing testcases, I always forget what
we're supposed to do :-(. Anyone knows if this is significant?