This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [PATCH] Adjust `pc-fp.exp' for ppc64/s390x (PR 12659)
On Wednesday, August 01 2012, Andreas Schwab wrote:
> Sergio Durigan Junior <sergiodj@redhat.com> writes:
>
>> Index: src/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/pc-fp.exp
>>
>> ===================================================================
>> --- src.orig/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/pc-fp.exp
>> +++ src/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/pc-fp.exp
>> @@ -66,4 +66,4 @@ gdb_test "info register \$fp" "${valueof
>> # Regression test for
>> # http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12659> gdb_test "info register pc fp" \
>> - "pc: ${valueof_pc}\[\r\n\]+fp: ${valueof_fp}\[\r\n\]+"
>> + "pc.*\[\r\n\]+fp.*\[\r\n\]+"
>
> That will of course match the erroneous output.
Ok, sorry.
Pedro, the patch below is the second version I sent, to handle Andreas'
observations on m68k-linux. It is more specialized than the previous
patch. Is it still OK to apply?
Thanks,
--
Sergio
Index: src/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/pc-fp.exp
===================================================================
--- src.orig/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/pc-fp.exp
+++ src/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/pc-fp.exp
@@ -66,4 +66,4 @@ gdb_test "info register \$fp" "${valueof
# Regression test for
# http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12659
gdb_test "info register pc fp" \
- "pc: ${valueof_pc}\[\r\n\]+fp: ${valueof_fp}\[\r\n\]+"
+ "pc(:)?( |\t)+${valueof_pc}(( |\t)+${valueof_pc} <.*>)?\[\r\n\]+fp(:)?( |\t)+${valueof_fp}(( |\t)+${valueof_fp})?\[\r\n\]+"