Re: [RFA]: Fix crashing bug in set follow-fork-mode

[Andrew Cagney <ac131313 at cygnus dot com>]

Daniel Berlin wrote:

> >
> > The testsuite should still be checking that the commands it expects are
> > there.  Otherwize  (as we've done once or twice ....) we  run the risk
> > of loosing commands / changing interfaces between releases :-(
> 
> Depending on your OS, without this patch, you will see the problem
> manifested in various different ways.
> It might say the command is ambiguous
> It might crash.
> It might work fine.
> It might decide to destroy various pieces of memory, and manifest itself
> as a completely different bug.
> The testsuite would point in the completely wrong direction, and you'd go
> chasing down the wrong path. With the patch, you know what
> the problem is. It tells you, and tells you where to find it.
> On my system, help set follow-fork-mode still showed the proper three
> choices. But it was still broken.
> If you can come up with a testsuite case, go for it.
> I just don't think it makes the most sense.
> If you want a testsuite case, i can make a maint function that does what
> this patch is doing, and we can add a testsuite case that runs the
> function, and fails if it outputs anything.

True, but that itsn't my motivation for suggesting a test.  It is more
to ensure that, once the functionality is working, it doesn't suffer bit
rot (dissapears, gets arbitrarily changed, ...).

	Andrew