This is the mail archive of the
gdb@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: A testsuite update, for the curious
- From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow at mvista dot com>
- To: gdb at sources dot redhat dot com
- Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 12:27:18 -0500
- Subject: Re: A testsuite update, for the curious
- References: <200301140818.h0E8IbE30657@duracef.shout.net>
On Tue, Jan 14, 2003 at 02:18:37AM -0600, Michael Elizabeth Chastain wrote:
> Daniel Jacobowitz writes:
> > One FAIL from gdb.gdb/complaints.exp.
>
> Hey, I'm not getting any FAILs from gdb.gdb/complaints.exp in any
> of my tested configurations.
It is dependent (like the rest of gdb.gdb/) on the compiler used to
build gdb and the optimization level. Do you use 2.95.3 +
optimization to build any of your GDB's?
> > a testsuite bug that only shows up with a relative path to configure,
>
> You probably already figured this out:
>
> # TODO: gdb.base/corefile.exp cannot handle relative objdir
> # it does "cd ${objdir}/${subdir}; ${binfile};" when
> # ${binfile} == ${objdir}/${subdir}/${testfile}.
>
> The fix is probably just s/${binfile}/${testfile} .
>
> BTW I am unable to run corefile.exp on native i686-pc-linux-gnu red-hat-8.0
> because red hat 8.0 turns on the kernel flag for core file names so that
> the names are 'core.12345' instead of 'core'.
Oh, very neat. I don't know why I didn't ever see this one; I was
referring to one of the new MI tests.
I get a lot of garbage core.NUMBER files but they're from one of the
other tests... a threaded one I think.
> > And something else is wrong in print-threads.exp; I occasionally see a
> > SIGSEGV in the testsuite log. But I can't reproduce it often enough to
> > get a good look at it.
>
> I get sporadic ERRORs in gdb.trace/actions.exp. I am not seeing this
> behavior in print-threads.exp and I am running 100+ of them per week
> (I run a lot of "infrastructure" test runs that I don't publish, but I
> would notice a bunch of core-dump-induced madness). I do see one other
> print-threads.exp problem that manifests with sourceware TCL+Expect+Dejagnu
> and does not manifest with stock TCL+Expect+Dejagnu. So it's quite
> possible that there are races that never get scheduled depending on
> subtle things like the version of Expect that you test with.
I've never seen the ERRORs; how bizarre... I'll look at your logs
sometime.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer