On Fri, 14 Jun 2013 15:02:47 +0200, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
> On Sun, 3 Feb 2013 18:27:21 +0100, Jan Kratochvil <jan.kratoch...@redhat.com>
> wrote:
> > gdb/testsuite/
> > 2013-02-02 Jan Kratochvil <jan.kratoch...@redhat.com>
> >
> > Workaround GCC PR debug/55056 and GDB PR server/15081.
> > * gdb.base/restore.c (caller3): Protect l1 by GCC_PR_55056 #ifdef.
> > (caller4): Protect l1 and l2 by GCC_PR_55056 #ifdef.
> > (caller5): Protect l1, l2 and l3 by GCC_PR_55056 #ifdef.
> > * gdb.base/restore.exp: New variable opts. Test caller3, caller4 and
> > caller5 for l1, l2 and l3. New prepare_for_testing.
> > * gdb.base/store.c (wack_longest, wack_float, wack_double)
> > (wack_doublest): Protect l and r by GCC_PR_55056 #ifdef.
> > * gdb.base/store.exp: New variable opts. Test longest, float, double
> > and doublest functions for l and r. New prepare_for_testing.
> > * gdb.trace/collection.c (reglocal_test_func): Protect locf and locd by
> > GCC_PR_55056 #ifdef. Protect locar by GDB_PR_15081 #ifdef.
> > * gdb.trace/unavailable.c: Likewise.
> > * gdb.trace/collection.exp: New variable opts. Test reglocal_test_func
> > for locf, locd and locar. New prepare_for_testing.
> > (gdb_collect_locals_test): Increase list size to 43.
> > * gdb.trace/unavailable.exp: Likewise.
>
> As far as I can tell, no consensus has yet been reached about the
> approach to fix this issue discussed in this thread. (I have not looked
> at the proposed patch in detail.)
I have found now I posted the testsuite workaround for GDB
http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2013-01/msg00688.html
but it has never been checked-in (neither in Fedora) which explains why you
see PASS->FAIL (which I also see on Fedora 19).
Jan
