This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [PATCH] Fix xfail Sparc pattern
- From: Andrew Cagney <ac131313 at cygnus dot com>
- To: Michael Elizabeth Chastain <mec at shout dot net>
- Cc: davem at redhat dot com, fnasser at redhat dot com, cagney at cygnus dot com,gdb-patches at sources dot redhat dot com
- Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2002 12:21:06 -0400
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix xfail Sparc pattern
- References: <200204181606.g3IG6U914843@duracef.shout.net>
> Fernando Nasser writes:
>
>> I wonder if we should activate this test and see where it fails and
>> start marking as XFAILS (KFAILS actually) and entering a bug report
>> when we see the regressions.
>
>
> I think so. The comment indicates that this is due to a problem
> inside gdb, not a problem with the environment, so that XFAIL is wrong
> in the first place.
>
> This is the old "XFAIL means an external program is not functional"
> versus "XFAIL means that gdb is wrong but it's too painful to fix"
> argument.
Sounds right to me. The ``correct fix'' is convert the code to generic
dummy frames (which in turn means work on generic dummy frames) but both
of those are GDB bugs.
Andrew