Re: [patch] kfail gdb.c++/annota2.exp annotate-quit

[Daniel Jacobowitz <drow at mvista dot com>]

On Wed, Dec 18, 2002 at 11:47:49PM -0600, Michael Elizabeth Chastain wrote:
> My testbed gives me 34 KFAIL's on 34 configurations, just fine.
> This is native i686-pc-linux-gnu, gcc v2 and v3, dwarf-2 and stabs+.
> 
> I use stock FSF dejagnu 1.4.3.  I also built dejagnu from the
> sourcware cvs "dejagnu" module and did a test run with that.
> That works fine too.
> 
> I have appended a gdb.sum file for anyone who is curious.
> The KFAIL line looks like this:
> 
>   KFAIL: gdb.c++/annota2.exp: annotate-quit (PRMS: c++/544)
> 
> We can't do anything about the "PRMS:" part, that comes from dejagnu.
> 
> I have an objection to the name "c++/544".  It is way too easy for
> this name to get quoted out of context (the context being that it is
> a gdb bug in the gdb database).  I think this will cause confusion.
> I would like to see "gdb/544" here.
> 
> Sure, right *now* while we are discussing the issue, everyone knows
> that "c++/544" means a gdb bug in the gdb PR database.  Wait six weeks
> and then quote some people a gdb.sum report that says "c++/482" in it
> and see if anyone jumps to the incorrect conclusion that c++/482 means
> a bug in the C++ compiler.

I want the C++ part in there.  How about "PRMS: [gdb] c++/544"?

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz
MontaVista Software                         Debian GNU/Linux Developer