Re: [testsuite] add gdb.cp/gdb1355.exp

[Andrew Cagney <ac131313 at redhat dot com>]

> Okay, I'm willing to make it an XFAIL rather than a KFAIL.
> I remember those threads.  The XFAIL feels odd but it does stand
> for "external" and this bug is indeed a textbook external bug.

Consider the standard example:

(gdb) detach PID

On old windows systems it couldn't work.  GDB reporting an error was an 
XFAIL, GDB dumping core was a fail.

> As far as making it a FAIL goes, I think David's argument comes down to:
> people pay attention to FAIL, but not to XFAIL or KFAIL.  I really don't
> like that situation.  I see the question as: whether to fight the
> situation and use more accurate XFAIL/KFAIL rather than generic FAIL, or
> to acquiesce to situation and give people what they expect to see.
> I favor the former.

David is correct.  Look at the number of additions to gdb.asm since it 
was changed to FAIL instead of ERROR.

However, we've adopted KFAIL XFAIL.

I also intend again proposing that existing XFAILS get yanked.

Andrew