This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: PATCH RFA: Fix MI stack frame output for synthetic frames
- From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow at mvista dot com>
- To: Jason Molenda <jason-swarelist at molenda dot com>
- Cc: David Carlton <carlton at math dot stanford dot edu>,Andrew Cagney <ac131313 at redhat dot com>, gdb-patches at sources dot redhat dot com,jjohnstn at redhat dot com
- Date: Mon, 3 Feb 2003 13:34:41 -0500
- Subject: Re: PATCH RFA: Fix MI stack frame output for synthetic frames
- References: <20021108142248.A65720@molenda.com> <3DCC3CEE.5040902@redhat.com> <20021109004723.A20334@molenda.com> <3E3CB218.1020706@redhat.com> <ro17kchb58n.fsf@jackfruit.Stanford.EDU> <20030203102748.A75701@molenda.com>
On Mon, Feb 03, 2003 at 10:27:48AM -0800, Jason Molenda wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 03, 2003 at 10:15:20AM -0800, David Carlton wrote:
>
> >
> > On i686-pc-linux-gnu/GCC3.1/DWARF2, I get the following:
> >
>
> > PASS: gdb.mi/mi-syn-frame.exp: 407-stack-list-frames
> > FAIL: gdb.mi/mi-syn-frame.exp: 408-exec-continue
> > FAIL: gdb.mi/mi-syn-frame.exp: 409-stack-list-frames 0 0
> > FAIL: gdb.mi/mi-syn-frame.exp: call inferior function which raises exception
> > FAIL: gdb.mi/mi-syn-frame.exp: backtrace from inferior function at exception
>
> I'll look at these late tonight unless someone else does it first.
The exec-continue failure seems to be a bad regular expression - it's
expecting "*stopped[\r\n]+", not any of the things which follow
*stopped. I'm not sure without looking at te test whether
stack-list-frames is a legitimate failure or not; it's reporting a
different function than expected.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer