This is the mail archive of the
binutils@sourceware.cygnus.com
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: ld test failure on ARM GNU/Linux
- To: Ian Lance Taylor <ian at zembu dot com>
- Subject: Re: ld test failure on ARM GNU/Linux
- From: Alan Modra <alan at linuxcare dot com dot au>
- Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2000 12:07:44 +1000 (EST)
- cc: rth at cygnus dot com, Philip dot Blundell at pobox dot com, binutils at sourceware dot cygnus dot com
On 10 Apr 2000, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2000 16:38:05 -0700
> From: Richard Henderson <rth@cygnus.com>
>
> > Richard, you
> > wrote this code in the first place; what would you expect to happen
> > with the ld/testsuite/ld-selective/3.cc code?
>
> As documented in the "keep" and "lose" comments in the test case.
> I don't believe there are any symbols not mentioned in the comments.
>
> Then the testsuite does not match the test case, and selective.exp
> should be fixed. And the test will presumably start failing when
> using gcc 2.95.2 on i386 GNU/Linux.
Not if you simply remove the test for absense of foo__1B
Like so.
--- ld/testsuite/ld-selective/selective.exp~ Sat Dec 11 12:07:22 1999
+++ ld/testsuite/ld-selective/selective.exp Tue Apr 11 11:35:18 2000
@@ -136,20 +136,14 @@ if ![ld_simple_link $ld tmpdir/3.x "$ldf
if ![ld_nm $nm tmpdir/3.x] {
unresolved $test4
} else {
- if {[info exists nm_output(foo__1B)]} {
- send_log "foo__1B == $nm_output(foo__1B)\n"
- verbose "foo__1B == $nm_output(foo__1B)"
- fail $test4
- } else {
- if {[ info exists nm_output(bar__1A)]} {
- send_log "bar__1A== $nm_output(_bar__1A)\n"
- verbose "bar__1A == $nm_output(_bar__1A)"
- fail $test4
- } else {
- pass $test4
- }
- }
- }
+ if {[ info exists nm_output(bar__1A)]} {
+ send_log "bar__1A== $nm_output(_bar__1A)\n"
+ verbose "bar__1A == $nm_output(_bar__1A)"
+ fail $test4
+ } else {
+ pass $test4
+ }
+ }
}
if { ![ld_compile "$CC $cflags $cxxflags" $srcdir/$subdir/4.cc tmpdir/4.o]} {
--
Linuxcare. Support for the Revolution.