This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [PATCH] Fix recent debug.exp failures
- From: Hans-Peter Nilsson <hans-peter dot nilsson at axis dot com>
- To: jakub at redhat dot com
- Cc: hans-peter dot nilsson at axis dot com, rth at redhat dot com, janis187 at us dot ibm dot com, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Sun, 14 Jun 2009 07:58:59 +0200
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix recent debug.exp failures
> Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2009 20:12:23 +0200
> From: Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>
> On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 06:38:20PM +0200, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:
> > A -gdwarf-21 is currently not the same as -gdwarf-2 -g1, as a
> > regtest of e.g. r148404 (before your change) together with
> > <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-06/msg00962.html> will
> > show. For example just C:
>
> That's because -gdwarf-2 -g1 as separate option no longer matches the
> "*1" check on the first argument.
Ah I completely missed the "set doit 0" pruning. ...which also
explains why it sort-of-worked when swapping the order to -g1
-gdwarf-2. :)
> PR testsuite/40426
> * lib/gcc-dg.exp (gcc-dg-debug-runtest): For type -gdwarf-2 and
> level != "" use separate -gdwarf-2 -g${level} options instead of
> -gdwarf-2${level}.
> * lib/gfortran-dg.exp (gfortran-dg-debug-runtest): Likewise.
> * gfortran.dg/debug/pr37738.f: Also skip if -gdwarf-2 -g1.
> * gfortran.dg/debug/pr35154-dwarf2.f: Likewise.
Looks good to me, not that I can approve it but I hope someone
does, soon.
brgds, H-P