This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [patchv2] PR gdb/17968 - [ppc64] SEGV in ppc64_elf_get_synthetic_symtab reading a separate debug file
- From: Jan Kratochvil <jan dot kratochvil at redhat dot com>
- To: Pedro Alves <palves at redhat dot com>
- Cc: Martin Sebor <msebor at redhat dot com>, gdb-patches at sourceware dot org
- Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2015 12:41:01 +0100
- Subject: Re: [patchv2] PR gdb/17968 - [ppc64] SEGV in ppc64_elf_get_synthetic_symtab reading a separate debug file
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <54E39F4C dot 6050607 at redhat dot com> <54E3D152 dot 6020804 at redhat dot com> <20150225210404 dot GA29761 at host1 dot jankratochvil dot net> <54EF0476 dot 7000605 at redhat dot com>
On Thu, 26 Feb 2015 12:33:10 +0100, Pedro Alves wrote:
> On 02/25/2015 09:04 PM, Jan Kratochvil wrote:
>
> > +# This test won't work properly if system debuginfo is installed.
> > +gdb_test_no_output "set debug-file-directory" ""
>
> I suspect this "" here would be for "no expected output", but
> given this is gdb_test_no_output, it actually means the test has
> no associated message. I think you want to remove that.
I do not care if "" gets removed or not but it was intentional this way.
(1) Some people prefer no gdb.sum line for testcases which really should never
FAIL and/or which are not a subject of the testfile. I am do not belong
between these people (if I care at all), though.
(2) Here I used it as the only other testcase will be often UNTESTED (due to
no ppc64 target support compiled in) - and it looks better if there is
only one UNTESTED result than one PASS + one UNTESTED which may give
a false feeling something got tested - which it was not.
> Otherwise this (patch and test) looks good to me.
So just if "" should be there or not.
Jan