Re: [patch] KFAIL gdb/1025

[Daniel Jacobowitz <drow at mvista dot com>]

On Tue, Feb 04, 2003 at 09:16:57AM -0800, David Carlton wrote:
> * I'm using the binutils that comes with Red Hat 7.3; rpm -q reports
>   it as binutils-2.11.93.0.2-11.  So it's old.  I'll upgrade that and
>   see what happens.  (And then do what to the test?  Turn it from
>   KFAIL into XFAIL, I suppose?)

That depends on the nature of the failure.  It might still be a KFAIL.

> * I gave the wrong GDB version: I was using CVS GDB from yesterday.  I
>   saw the FAILs using 'make check' on yesterday's CVS, but then I
>   investigated it using whatever GDB happened to be in /usr/local/bin
>   (which, if you're curious, is the current dictionary branch GDB, and
>   I haven't sync'd with mainline since whatever old date I listed).  I
>   try to remember to use CVS GDB when investigating bugs, so I get the
>   date entered right, but sometimes I forget.
> 
> And I have some other questions/comments:
> 
> * If it's all due to binutils, why do Michael's tables still show some
>   non-PASS results with GCC 2.95.3/DWARF-2?
> 
> * It's not the same as PR 872.  That's about overload resolution; this
>   bug doesn't seem to be related to overload resolution.

Oh, blah, my apologies.  overload.exp has tests with almost the same
names.  If you could send me a compiled binary which does show the
problem I'd appreciate that.  Attach it to the PR maybe.

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz
MontaVista Software                         Debian GNU/Linux Developer