This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: Clean up gdb.c++ tests for dwarf 1
- From: David Carlton <carlton at math dot stanford dot edu>
- To: Jim Blandy <jimb at redhat dot com>
- Cc: Michael Elizabeth Chastain <mec at shout dot net>, fnasser at redhat dot com, gdb at sources dot redhat dot com, Daniel Jacobowitz <drow at mvista dot com>
- Date: 05 Feb 2003 13:47:22 -0800
- Subject: Re: Clean up gdb.c++ tests for dwarf 1
- References: <200302052130.h15LUHB10715@duracef.shout.net><firstname.lastname@example.org>
On 05 Feb 2003 16:29:14 -0500, Jim Blandy <email@example.com> said:
> Michael Elizabeth Chastain <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
>> (1) Just remove these calls to setup_xfail_format. If someone runs the
>> gdb test suite with DWARF 1, the test suite will do its job and
>> give FAIL results for all the C++ tests that do not work with DWARF
> Your rationale here is that, since we don't really know which of
> these failures are genuine, can't-be-done-with-Dwarf-1 expected
> failures, and which are GDB bugs, you want to dump them all into the
> "genuine bug" category and start re-categorizing, using our modern
> interpretation of XFAIL and KFAIL?
I won't speak for Michael, but my rationale is that, based on
discussions over the last few weeks and based on the patch to
gdb.texinfo that I committed on Monday, we currently don't support C++
on DWARF 1. The testsuite is cluttered with XFAILs that we have no
reason to believe are either correct or comprehensive; the two obvious
choices, then, are to either throw them out entirely or to XFAIL
everything, which are Michael's options 1 and 2.
If at some point in the future somebody decides to start working on
improving C++ DWARF 1 support in GDB (and, presumably, in GCC), then
that person can take the time to sort through what works, what doesn't
work because of failures in GDB, what doesn't work because of failures
in GCC, and what doesn't work because of limitations in the debug
format. I doubt anybody will be motivated to do so; getting rid of
the current XFAIL's won't hurt such an effort, however.