This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [PATCH] quoting curly braces in call-rt-st
- To: ac131313 at cygnus dot com, chastain at cygnus dot com, msnyder at cygnus dot com
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] quoting curly braces in call-rt-st
- From: Michael Elizabeth Chastain <chastain at cygnus dot com>
- Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2001 08:34:09 -0700
- Cc: gdb-patches at sources dot redhat dot com
I think the patterns are breaking now because a different person is
running them in a different environment -- specifically, with a different
version of 'expect'. I always use /usr/progressive/bin/expect
on every platform. I'm not sure what MichaelS is using; it depends
on his path.
This means our test harness machinery is vulnerable and fragile.
That's not good. :(
I did some grepping:
% cd /horton/chastain/fsf/log
% grep -r 'FAIL.*call-rt-st.exp' *
My only FAIL's or XFAIL's are due to that new "procfs" message.
> For what its worth I was having fun running expect on Red Hat 7.x.
> Zapping the expect built from CVS so that the pre-installed expect was
> used mysteriously eliminated the problem.
That's weird because I get *more* fails when I use /usr/bin/expect!
Do you have /usr/progressive/bin in your path in front of /usr/bin?
BTW, I changed my test script recently so that it creates a new directory,
explicitly copies in the version of "expect" that I want to use,
and sticks that directory at the head of $PATH.
> PS: As an aside, I know Ian Rox. is thinking of hardwiring expects
> pattern matcher because the tcl8.0->tcl8.3 transition results in broken
> patterns.
I saw that message going by. I think that would help. Tom Tromey also
says that our gdb_test stack is nasty code.
MichaelC