This is the mail archive of the
binutils@sourceware.org
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: bogus test case expectations
On Tue, Jul 21, 2009 at 8:18 AM, Jan Beulich<JBeulich@novell.com> wrote:
>>>> "H.J. Lu" <hjl.tools@gmail.com> 21.07.09 16:38 >>>
>>On Tue, Jul 21, 2009 at 4:51 AM, Jan Beulich<JBeulich@novell.com> wrote:
>>> Finally I found time to debug why, after initially working with the
>>> snapshot_symbol() change I had done in late 2005, some local changes I
>>> had on top of this stopped working in newer binutils releases. I was about
>>> to propose below change (with the rationale that the comment "Never
>>> change a defined symbol.", while correct, didn't match the code, as the
>>> check was done against the perhaps already updated symbol, not the
>>> one that got passed in). This, however, causes one of the four ia64 test
>>> cases added together with that change to fail.
>>
>>I have no objections to update comments.
>
> My goal is to make the code do what the comment says (which is what I'd
> also expect the code to do), not adjust the comment. But perhaps I mis-
> understand the intentions you had when making the change? If so, you'd
> be asked to provide a comment explaining those intentions...
>
My change was to fix
http://www.sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2117
ltoff22x-2.[sd] is one testcase for PR 2117. As long as those
testcases pass without modifications, I have no problems.
--
H.J.